CS 71 
.H177 
11902 
Copy 2 




*>^.^€^f 






/ 




/Z- 




JOHN HALL 
OF WALLINGFORD, CONN. 



A MONOGRAPH 



BY 



JAMES SIIEPAED. 



New Britain, Conn. 
1902. 

RECORD PRESS 



/ 



n 



K. 



JOHN HALL, OF WALLINGFORD, CONN. 



John Hall, of New Haven and Wallingford, was one 
of the after signers to the New Haven Planters' covenant, 
June 4, 1639, but the exact date of his signature thereto 
is not known. His autograph with that of the other after 
signers may be seen on page 3, first book of the New 
Haven Cok^ny records, and is the twenty-third autograph 
there given. The original agreement and names of the 
first signers are recorded in a uniform hand. This is 
followed by numerous autographs. From this fact it is 
thought that the original agreement when first signed, 
June 4, 1639, was on a loose sheet of paper and that the 
agreement and the names of the first signers were after- 
wards transcribed in the book by the clerk wlio left a 
blank space for subsequent signers. No date is given for 
any of these later signers. 

John Hall was in New Haven before Jan. 17, 1641, 
when he received land on Mill River at a meeting held on 
that date for the purpose of distributing land to the 
inhabitants by casting lots. He was a soldier in the 
Pequot war. May and June, 1637, as is shown by a grant 
of fifty acres of land fiom the General Court of the Colony 
of Connecticut, at the October session in 1698, to his 
son Thomas Hall of Wallingford, ''in consideration of his 
father's service in the Pequott warre." (C. R. Vol. 4, 
276.) From 1641 until his death, 1676, his record is 
clear and free from doubt, but with the single exception 
of the fact that he was in the Pequot war of 1637, all 
records prior to his signing the New Haven Covenant are 
liable to be confounded with those of some other John 
Hall, which was by no means an uncommon name. 

In the Hartford division of land of 1639, (so called) 
one John Hall had six acres of land given him by court- 
esie of the town. This fact in connection with the grant 



of hiini iVoiii the Colony lor services in tlic Peqnol war, 
woiiUl be ounclusive that Jolm M:ill of New Haven was 
tlic ori},Mnal settler of Hartford Ki.'UJ, who had land in 
the distribution of ](>.'{'.), and that lie went to the war from 
Hartford witii Captain Mason, were it not for the fact 
that the Jiev. David B. Hall in his Halls of Xew En<,dand, 
1S8.'{, (and others following- him), assei't that John Hall 
of iNIiddletown, Conn., was the original settler of Hart- 
ford, while others have published the supposition that 
John Hall of New Haven went to tlie Pecpiot war with 
Geni'ral tStoughton's men from Massachusetts (Genealogical 
notes by Theo. Parsons Hall, 1886, and Hall Ancestry, 
by Charles S. Hall, 1890.) Two questions are therefore 
laised. which can only be answei-ed by a full review of 
all the facts in connection with the history of the early 
settlers of Hartford, inst, did John Hall live at Hartford 
or Mass., at the time of his going to the Pequot war, 
and sec(^nd, was John Hall of New Haven, or John Hall 
of Middletown, the original settler of Hartford, to whom 
six acres of laud was granted iu the division of 1G39? 

One John Hall was made a freeman at Boston, May 14, 
KJ.Sl. Pope's Pioneers of Mass. says this was John Hall 
of Charlestown and so also does Savage. Charles S. Hall, 
Esqr., thinks this was John Hall of New Haven. John 
Hall of Charlestown signed the Church covenant there 
Aug. 25, 1630. The list of Freemen at Boston, begins 
with Oct. 19, 16.S0. It is not ])robable that any one 
would have waited four years after being a resident 
and a church member, before being made a freeman, and 
notwithstanding the statement of Pope and Savage, the 
pi-obability is that this John Hall of Charlestown was 
made a freeman before 1631, although no record is now 
found of the same. Eev. Messrs. Hooker and Stone 
were also made voters on this day, and thej" came to New 
England only the September before. In the same list we 
find the Tianies of IMr. William Brenton, Thomas Hubbard 
and John Walker and others who were afterwards known 
to have been friends or associates of John Hall of New 
Haven and we may assume that his right to be made a 
freeman accrued about the same time as that of his com- 
panions, whereas the rights of John Hall of Charlestown, 
to be made freenum had accrue(l three or more j'cars 
before. 



In the first record of the division of lands in Hartford 
1639, we find also the name of John Hall, Messrs. Hooker 
and Stone and others who were made voters on that same 
14th of May in 1034, and the presumption is that this 
same John Hall belonged either to the Hooker party who 
came over in 1(332, or the later party who came in 1633. 

In the absence of any record or proof to the contrary 
we would presume that the Pequot soldier of 1037, to 
whose son the colony of Connecticut gave land in com- 
pensation for this service, enlisted from Connecticut, and 
the original settler of Hartford is where we would 
naturally expect to find the John Hall of the Hooker 
party. If he was not from Hartford we may suppose 
almost with certainty, that he enlisted either from 
Windsor, Wethersfield, or Saybrook, the only other 
settlements in the state at that time. Tliere were about 
twenty men who went to this war from Saybrook, and 130 
from the other three towns. In the Colonial records, we 
find grants of land to only thirty-five persons besides John 
Hall, for services in the Pequot war, less than one third 
of the whole number of Connecticut men. Of these 
thirty-five, all but one are known to have been residents 
of Connecticut in 1037. That one is Captain Nathaniel 
Merriman, whose first known location in this Country 
was New Haven, 1039. No one has ever suggested, so 
far as we know, that he did not enlist from Connecticut 
and we firmly believe that he was living in Connecticut 
before 1037, although we cannot say where. If Hall did 
not enlist from Connecticut the foregoing record of grants 
shows that the Hall grant was a notable exception to the 
general rule. In fact the presumption created by this 
grant, that he lived in Connecticut in 1037, is so strong 
that it would be accepted as conclusive, were it not for 
the suppositions before referred to that he enlisted from 
Massachusetts. It has also been supposed that he resided 
at or near Boston from the time he was made a freeman 
1634, until we find him in New Haven 1039 or 40 ; not 
because any record of him has been found in Boston, but, 
we suppose, because no record has been found elswhere 
that was thought to belong to him. If the Colony of 
Connecticut granted land for the service of this John Hall 
under such different circumstances from that of the other 



grants, tlic piesiiiiipluii is lluil suinelliing ^V()nld liave 
appearcMl in the record of that jijrant to show some 
reason lor departinj; from the usual custom of giving 
Connecticut land only to Connecticut soldiers. If he was 
living in Connecticut in l(i37, what .Fohn Hall can establish 
a better right to be considered as the oiiginal settler of 
Hartford, than John Hall of New Haven who is positively 
known to have been a Pef|Uot soldier in 1()37, and pro- 
itabl}' a resident of Hartford as early as Hi'Mi '. 

There are no muster rolls of tlie Pequot soldiers of 
either Connecticut or .Massachusetts excepting that there 
is a list of the Plymouth men who enlisted but did not 
get ready to go until after the war was over. The quota 
for fourteen towns of Massachusetts is given in Savage's 
Wintliroi), p. Ii(j5, note, but so far as we can learn no 
list of the men from Massachusetts has ever been compiled 
and there is no complete list of the Connecticut men. 
Several persons have made and ])ublished lists from 
certain towns as taken from land records, Colonial reports, 
and other sources, but nothing like a complete list has 
ever been made, and i)roV)ably the list already made, 
besides being incomplete, may include some who did not 
serve. All of the Connecticut men, as found in these 
various lists, have been compiled and arranged alphabetic- 
ally by the present writer, together with the authority 
or authorities from which each name was taken. From 
all of these sources we tind the names of only 89 men out 
of the 150 who went from Connecticut. The most 
exhaustive list and the most comprehensive paper ever 
compiled as to the Hartford men is "The Soldiers Field," 
by Francis H. Parker of Hartford, (U. S. District 
Attorney for Connecticut) read before the Connecticut 
Historical Society of Hartford, Jan. 4. 1887. and the 
sup[)lcincnt thereto dated Feb. 5, 1880. The manuscript 
is now in the Library of the society. In this paper Mr. 
Parker puts down John Hall of Xew Haven and Walling- 
ford, as "one of the early settlei's of Hai'tford whose land 
was forfurted by removal fiom town." In conversation 
he stated that this was done with lull knowledge of the 
claim that John Hall of Middletown was. one of the 
early settlers of Hartfoi'd, but tliat he and the late Sherman 
W. Adam.s, caiefully considered the matter and they found 



evidence conclusive to both of them, that John Hall of 
New Haven, instead of John Hall of Middletown, Avas the 
early settler to whom land was granted by the town. 

In 1838 to 40, Wm. S. Porter, Surveyor and Anti- 
quarian, made a map of Hartford as it was in l(j40, and in 
1842 he published his Historical notices of Hartford. 
The map was made from an exhaustive study of the land 
records, such as no other person has ever given. On this 
map the name of John Hall appears on only two lots. 
A lot south of present Asylum Street, and west of the rail 
road is marked ''John Hall to Wm. Spencer,'' and a lot 
on what is now Bushnell park is marked "Wm. Gibbons 
bot of John Freind, John Hale bot of Blumfield." The 
first lot is numbered 88 and the second 93 on Henry F. 
Smith's reproduction of Porter's 1640 map. Lot iSTo. 88 
has a house on it, lot 93 has no house. Porter did not 
number the lots on his map, but in his notes he gave 
numbers for convenience of description. The Hall to 
Spencer lot he designated as No. 77. He also says "The 
original proprietors who did not settle on their respec- 
tive lots or who deceased or removed from town before 
1640, are included in brackets." Opposite No. 77, he 
puts John Hall in brackets in a list of "first settlers who 
were not original proprietors."' It will thus be seen that 
while lot No. 77 of Porter, Smith's No. 88, had once been 
the home lot of one John Hall, there is no lot on that 
map with a house on it standing in the name of John Hall. 

A few facts about the early settlers of Hartford and 
their land, will be useful in considering the question of 
John Hall's Hartford land. 

With the exception of one entry, Hartford has no 
record of any kind of a date prior to Feb., 1639. That 
record is published in Hartford Town Votes page 1, and 
begins as follows: "Hartford 1635. Its ordered that whos- 
ever hath A lott granted in this Towne and Remoues from 
the same to dwell wi*^in ffower years after the granting 
of such lotts: then the sd lott or Lotts is to returne vnto 
the hands of the Towne agayne" &c. The prefatory note 
to the printed edition says that this "record could not 
have been made at that date, nearly two years before 
Hartford was named. The conditions, however, upon 



8 

wliicli lands wore <;rautoil may have hct-ii llius established 
at tlie bo.<;iiiiiiiii:; of the settleiueiit." The name M'as 
changed from Newtowne to * 'Hartford Towne" Feb. 21, 
1().')(>. Th<; list of oi-iginal proprietors by ])urcliase and 
by eoiulesie, is dated UHV.K It is called the division 
of 1G39 because it bears that date and there is no record 
of any earlier division. There must however have been 
some kind of allotment or division before tliat date as 
shown by the i)rior vote :us to forlfciluie of lotts granted. 
Those who came to Hartford in ItJS.") and 1036 did not 
wait until lG3i) before they knew what land they could 
have to build on. They undouljtedly had land at the start 
and although no division w;is recorded until 1G39. that 
divisi£)n gave them the laud that they first occupied, and 
theii- right to it was the same as if the division had been 
made when they iii'st settled on it. In other words the 
division of 1<).39 made formal the divisions which had 
been informally made before that date. It is a common 
error to suppose that those who liad land by courtesie 
were later comers. The 1(539 list includes those that were 
there iis early as ir)35 and the list of the original proprie- 
tors by purchase, ;ind land owners by courtesie "were both 
entered at the same time, so that one kind of settler was 
there Just as early as the other. We know certainly that 
sev^eral of these owning land by courtesie were Hartford 
soldiers in the Pequot war in the spring of 1637. They 
were all original settlers and Porter calls them all "first 
settlers." The only diirerence between them was, that 
the origin ul proprietors put money into the general fund 
for the purchase of the land and what Porter calls the 
''first settlers who were not original proprietors" decliiu'd 
to put money into the general fund. While the land by 
courtesie of the town was in the form of a gift to those who 
had no legal claim, it was not a gift without consideration. 
The recii)ients were in some way a l)enefit to the town. 
Is was a benelit to the town to even add one unol)jeetional 
person to the pioneer settlement and if that persoji was an 
artizan, or a teacher, the benelit was still greater. No 
d«jubt some of the original proprietors may not havesettled 
in Hartford until -.ilter 1636, and the same is true of those 
who had land by courtesie of • the town, but the great 
majority of both classes were at Hartford in 163<). If 
there is ;uiy ditfei-once in t nu\ the jirobabilty is that those 



who put in money as original proprietors may have been 
admitted of a later date than the last of those who were 
given land by eourtesie. To merely add one person or 
family to their number was a greater benefit in 1G36 than 
it was in 1G31>, and thei-efore if an ordinary person 
received land by eourtesie of the town, it is more than 
probable that he was there about 1636. Only those of 
unusual importance would be likely to receive land by 
eourtesie as late as 1639, and men of such importance 
would probably l)e r.\en of sufficient means to subscribe to 
the common fnnds and become original proprietors. In 
fact, after 1636 the ''emigration grew less and less until 
1638, and though large numbers came to Massachusetts 
that year (1636) very few seem to have come to Connect- 
icut," (Andrew's "Eiver Towns of Conn." p. 139.) The 
probabilities are that John Hall who received six acres of 
land by eourtesie of the town in the so called division of 
1639 was in Hartford as early as 1636. 

Turning now to the records : in the Connecticut 
Historieal Society Collections, Vol. VI, Hartford Towne 
votes, page 20, in the list of inhabitants having lotts at 
"The townes Courtesie" we find the name of John Hall. 
On page 24 of the same book we find that there were six 
acres of land in such "lotts." 

In Hartford land records, Copy of Distributions, 
1639 to 1688, page 386, .(original p. 382) under the date 
1610, Land belonging to William Spencer is recorded as 
follows — 

' 'One parcell on which his dwelling house now standeth 
with other out houses yards and gardines tharein being 
Contayning by estimation two acres more or less wch he 
bought of John Halles abutting on the little river on the 
south and on the hyway leading from the mill into the 
Contre on the East and on the North and on the old 
pasture on the west." 

This was John Hall's home lot on Lord's Hill, now 
Asylum hill, south of Asylum Street and west of the 
railway. 

A^so page 387, "One parcell lying in the Pyne field 
4 acres wch he bought of John Halles." 



10 

This was outside hiiul, north ul' Asvlum JSt. iiiul south 
of All):iny Ave. The liouie lot of 2 acres and this outside 
piece of 4 acres, make six acres, and as no other deeds 
show anowncrshiji or sale l)y John Hall of six acres, it is 
safe to assume that this is the land granted by courtesie of 
the town. This is further evidenced by the tiict that it 
M'as custonuiry to give these grants in two pieces, one 
a home lot in town of two acres and the balance in 
another piece outside of the porton set oil' for home h)ts. 

P. 410 original p. 405. No date but supposed to be 
the laud owned in Feb., 1639. 

"Land belonging to John Halles Sinor. viz. One 
psell on which his dwelling house standeth with other 
out houses. Yards, gardines tharein being contain by 
estimation one acre be it more or less which he bought of 
William PloUtten abutting on a highway on the East and 
on the west and on the North and on Pall Pecks land on 
the South. 

One psell of land wich he bought of William Blum- 
filld and was a psill of his house lot contain by estima one 
acre be it more or less, abutting on Ralph Keelers lott or 
land on the West and on William Bloumtilldes land on the 
East and Joseph Migattes land on the south and on the 
highway leading to the old mill on the north." 

The first piece, the house lot, cannot be definitely 
located. There is no record of Holton's land that is 
Itounded on three sides V)y a highway and no i-ecord of 
his land bounde'.l south l)y Paul Peck except his home lot 
on Washington street which was certainly not this lot, and 
there is no record of any other lot of Paul Peck's bounded 
north l)y William Hollen. Holten owned land west ot" 
Washington Street and this land was jjrobabiy there. It 
was outside of tlu- limits covered by the Porter 1640 Map. 

The land he bought of Blumfield was on what is now 
Bushnell park. 

p. 584, original 567, 1680. "Land belonging to John 
Hale." 



11 

One parcell of land on the East side of tlic great river 
which he bonght of John Dix with a liouse standing there- 
on, &c. This was in East Hartford. 



p. 242, original 238, Feb. 1G39. "Land belonging to 
James Ensign 

One pcell on which his dwelling house now standeth 
con by estima two acres be it more or les part whareof he 
bonght of John Halles and another he bonght of widow 
Richards abutting on the highway leading towed Farm- 
ington on the East and on a highway leading to John 
Beddelles land on the west and on Pall Pecks land and on 
Benjamin Harbordtts land on the south." 

This land was probably near Park st. west of Lafayette 
Street. 

p. 283, original 275, Feb. 1639, Land of William 
Holten. 

"One pcell land by Hockanum river 30 acres, part 
whereof he bought of John Moda and another pt. of 
John Halles" &c. 

This was in East Hartford. 

p. 322, original 322, No date. "Land in Hartford 
morgaged to Edmond Angermower latt of Cambridg in 
N'ew England by William Edwards for the paying of forty 
& five bush of wheat and twenty bushell of pease at 
several payments the last whereof is in May One thousand 
six hundred and fifty. 

One parsell one pt. whereof he bought of John 
Halles and another part of William Bloumfield with two 
tenements standing thereon containing by estima two acres 
be it more or less abutting on the highway leding to John 
Willcockes on the East and North and ou John Willcock 
land on the West and on his own land on ye south." 

This includes the land, p. 410, that "John Hall, Sinor" 
bought of William Blumfield, but no record is found of the 
deed convejdng this land to William Edwards. 



12 

p. 475, oii;;in;il VJ'S, Oct 2S, 1G53. ''Land bclong- 
iug to Thomas Catling. 

One pcell of land wcli liee l)Ouglit of John Hall Senior 
contaying by estiinatioii three acres be it more or less 
lying Jieer the wolf pound abutting upon the highway on 
the east and on the rivei-et on the west and upon the land 
of John Bernard upon the south and Arthur Smith upon 
the north." 

The west end of this lot must of been in the north 
part of Pope park, between Park Street and Capitol Ave. 
The foregoing includes c\ery ])i»'ce of land on record prior 
to 1().S8 in connection with which the name of John llall, 
or Hale, or similar name, appears as either grantor or 
grantee. 

On page 42, same book of distributions, Feb. 1639, 
Raljdi Keeler enters his house lot as bounded on the east 
by John Hall's land. 

p. 311, 163!>, William Rlumfield enters his house lot as 
bounded on the west by John Hall's land. 

p. 230, Xo date. John Wileox enters one piece of 
land boumled on "John Halles land Senior on the south." 
This land was outside the limits of Porters map, some- 
where west of Lafayette Street. 

p. 519, Oct. IS, 1655, the above land sold by Wilcox 
to John Bidwell and bounded "on land belonging to 
Thomas P>unce or John Hall Senr of Midleton South." 

The above entries by Keeler and IJlumfield Feb. 1639, 
show that John Hall senior owned the land on Bushncll 
park on or before Feb. 1()39. This land was originally 
laid out to John Freind (or at least one-half of it,) who 
forfeited it by removal from town, although he first 
illegally sold it to William (Jibbons. 

In Hart fold Town Votes p. 15. under date 14 Jan. 
1639, the town agree "that Gibbons .shall enjoy the same 
as given him from the Towne but because he brake an 
order in Buying same he shall pay" a fine. Xo record is 
found wherein Gibbons sold his land to Bluiiifield. who sold 
it to John Hall Senior, but by this vote and the Keeler 



13 

and Blnmfield entries we fiud that John Hall senior did not 
bny this land until sometime after Jan. 14, 1G31), and 
before the last of Feb. 1639. There is nothing to show- 
that he ever owned any land in Hartford before Feb., 
1639, and while no date appears in the entry of his land, 
p. 410, it appears to be entered as land that he owned in 
Feb., 1639. January and February 1639, under the 
present style of dating would be 1640, and the earliest 
possible record in Hartford that any one can claim for 
John Hall senior is after Jan. 14, 1639-40. All of the 
first entries in the book of distribution, unless dated 
subsequently to Feb. 1639, are supposed to be land that 
the respective owners had at that date. There are a few 
entries, like the Spencer laud, page 386, bearing date 1640, 
sandwiched in between those dated Feb., 1639, but all 
in the same style of writing and same kind of ink. It 
thus appears that these entries dated Feb. 1639, were not 
all of them recorded until sometime in 1640, but they all 
were records of land owned on or before Feb. 1639, no 
matter when they were recorded. Blank spaces were left 
in which insertions have since been made, but these 
insertions are easily distinguished in the original book. 
The six early entries immediately preceding that of John 
Hall's land, page 405, of the original book, are each dated 
Feb., 1639, and the date preceding these six entries is 1640. 
The first date in the same style of writing after page 405, 
is Mar., 1644, on page 407. Page 410 is evidently a 
subsquent insertion and here forty pages are lacking, 
the next page after 410 being 451. The book has been 
rebound so that it does not show a gap at the missing 
pages, but as the date on page 451 is 1645, and no earlier 
date follows it, we judge that 40 pages containing all 
records for about one year have been removed and that no 
mistake was made in numbering the pages. This may 
account for the fact that certain transfers as to the land we 
are considering are not found of record. As the book now 
stands this land of John Hall Senior's on page 405, 
clearly appears to be the record of the land which he 
owned in Feb., 1639, and also the very last one of the 
records of that date. This is certainly correct as to the 
date of the Blumfield lot on Bushnell park and probably 
correct as to the date of the home lot which was outside 
of the thickly settled x^ortion of the town. 



14 

John Hall Senior is easily followed in various records 
from Feb., 1G39, when his land was entered in Hartford, 
until Ort. IS, 1G55, after lie had removed to Middletown, 
Conneetient and therefore it is abscjlutely certain that all 
records in ilaitford of "John Hall Senioi" refer to John 
Hall (»f .Middletown. Assuming that one John Hall had a 
house in l<i4() on the lot which he sold to William S])encer, 
we lind that liefctie IG-lU there were two lots with houses 
tlicreon in Hartford under the name of John Hall. This 
fact alone would indicate to every studious antiquarian 
that these two home lots belonfjed to two different persons 
bearini^ the same name, because at that early date it was 
an unusual thinj; for one person to own at one time two 
lots with his dwelling house thereon. That these lots were 
owned by two different ])ersons is further indicated by the 
fact that one is recorde(l to plain .John Hall and the otlier 
to John Hall Senior. John Hall of New Haven was 
about 21 yeai-s younger than John Hall of Middletown, 
so that senior was the proper designation for the latter. 
They could however, and ordinarily would have been 
distinguished from each other by merely designating the 
younger as Junior, and the fact that this was not done 
indicates that John Hall Jr. was in Hartford before John 
Hall, Senr. and his name was entered in the list of inhabit- 
ants as plain John Hall instead of Junior, because at that 
time he was only John Hall of Hartford and there was 
no need of any distinguishing aftix. On the contrary 
when John Hall the elder appeared in Hartford, he 
entered his land under the title of "John Hall Senr." just 
as a second comer of the same name would have done in 
order to distinguish himself from the younger John Hall 
who was previously of record in Hartford. 

Again supposing the division of Jan. 1, KJ.'^O, was 
actually made at that date instead of before, thus l.)ringing 
the dates of division and purchase much nearer together, 
it is a significant fact the Hall land in that division is 
entered under the name of ]>lain John Hall while the land 
which John Hall of MiddU'town purchased Avithin al)out 
a month of the same time, is entered under the name 
of John Hall Senior. This furthei- implies that John 
Hall tilt' original settler and John llall who ])urchased 
land at llaitl'ord in 1G39, were two different persons. 



15 

Savage and D. B. Hall both agree that John Hall oi 
Middletown, came from Roxbury, Mass. The Report 
of the Record Commissioners, in their Roxbury record 
p. 4, under date between 1G3G and 1640, gives a list of the 
inhabitants of Roxbury in which is the name of John 
Hall, having 12 acres of land and 4 persons in the family. 
His name also appears with the prefix Mr. in Elliott's 
church records of Roxbury. Ellis's History of Roxbury 
gives the date of the list of Roxbury inhabitants as 
certainly after 1638 and before 1640, Memorial History 
of Boston p. 407, gives the date for this list as 1639. 

We thus find that John Hall of Miklletowu was Mr. 
John Hall of Roxbury, Massachusetts in 1638, with no 
affix, but when he reached Hartford in the same year he 
was John Senior. He must have had some reason for thus 
changing his name and the most probable reason is that 
when he arrived in Hartford, he was for the first time 
obliged in some way to distinguish himself from a prior 
inhabitant of the same name. It is true that he had a son 
John, but this son was only 20 years old in 1639, was not 
a land holder, and there was no reason why he should take 
the title Senior to distinguish himself from his son, rather 
than having his son take the title Junior. These facts 
clearly point to John Hall of New Haven as the original 
settler of Hartford rather than John Hall of Middletown, 
who was evidently a later settler. 

Furthermore whatever the date of recording the land 
of John Hall Senior may have been, it is a record of the 
laud he owned in Feb. 1639. The six acres given by the 
town were not sold until some time after March 25, 1640, 
and before March 26, 1641 present style of dating. If he 
had owned these six acres in 1639 they would have been 
included in his land of 1639. He would have done 
this to make the record complete even if his land record 
was not entered until after the six acres had been sold. 
The fact therefore that the entry of the land belonging to 
John Hall Senior in 1639, does not include the six acres 
sold in 1640, is conclusive evidence that John Hall of 
Middletown never owned the six acres granted by court- 
esie of the town. 



16 

While Mr. Francis II. Parker is no doubt correct in 
his conchisioii dial John Hall of New Haven was the 
original settler of Hartford and therefore went from that 
place to the Pequot war, he appears to be in error in 
assuming that he forfeited the said land by removal from 
town. ^Ir. Parker did not find any record of such 
forfeiture but assumed the same under the general rules. 
Under the first rules of IG.Jo, land was forfeited if the 
owner removed from the land within lour years after it 
was granted. H"the date of the giant .should be considered 
as l(!o!>, the record date of the first division, then ]\Ir. 
Parker would be right in supposing that John Hall 
forfeited this land under tliat rule. On the othei- hand if 
the date of the grant be considered as 1G35 or 36 when 
first occupied, tlieu one Mho had land in Hartford at 
the start would have a right to sell in 164(» without 
forfeiture, and this six acres of land was not sold until 
sometime in 1640. In Hartford tOMU votes, p. 41, under 
date of Feb. 18, 1640, find this vote, "Its ordered yt euery 
man yt hath beene an Inhabitant foure years shall haue 
power to sell all the Lands tliat he is possessed of." 

Under this rule, no matter when the land was granted, 
John Hall of Xew Haven would have had full right to 
sell his land without forfeiture, any time after Feb. IS, 
1640, provided he came to Hartford as we suppose he did 
in lO.S") or 6. John Hall of Middletown however, re- 
mained in Roxbury, Massachusetts so late tliat he could 
not have sold land in Hartford under either rule in the 
year 1640. 

Again the date of this sale points to John Hall of New 
Haven rather than of Middletown. It is true that John 
of Middletown sold land in 1639, but it was not a sale of 
his home lot, nor a sale of all his land in Hartford. 
On the contrary the six acres sold in 1640 includes not 
only the home lot, but all the land of record in Hartford 
that John Hall of New Haven is sui^posed to have ever 
owned. The date also appears to be so nearly the date 
of his appearance in New Haven, as to clearly indicate 
a change of residence from Hartford to New Haven, 
about the time of selling the Hartford land. The clearing 
out or removal sale of John Hall of Middletown does not 
appear to liave taken place until about 16.j3. 



17 

Jolin Hall of Middletown was a Carpenter and if he 
had not remained at lioxbury so hite we would lind in his 
trade, a benefit to the town such as might be compensat- 
ed by a courteous grant of hmd, but it is extremely 
doubtful that any one who resided at Roxbury, Mas- 
sachusetts in 1639, sliould also have been given land in 
Hartford in that year by courtesie of the town even if 
lie was a desirable artizan. Again he appears to have 
been a man of some means and to have bought considerable 
land. He was just such a man as we would expect to find 
in the list of original purchasers or proprietors, rather than 
one seeking courtesie, provided he was in Hartford early 
enough, but the probability is that he came to Hartford 
too late to be included in the division of 1C39 under 
either head. On the other hand, John Hall of New Haven 
is not known to have resided in any jjlace other than 
Hartford between 1030 and 40, excepting as he may 
have resided temjiorarily at Wethersfield; he was a young 
man just starting in life, and all he could expect to do in 
Hartford was to add one accei^table person to rlie pioneer 
settlement. He was in fact, if one of the first comers, 
the ideal person to receive land by courtesie of the town 
rather than by purchase. We know that he was a soldier 
in the Pequot war and probably enlisted from Hartford. 

From the foregoing facts, the question as to which of 
the two John Halls was the original settler of Hartford, 
can only be answered in favor of John Hall of Kew 
Haven, This necessarily answers the other question 
that he resided at Hartford in 1637, when he enlisted as 
a soldier in the Pequot war. 

The only testimony that can be found showing John 
Hall of Middletown to have been the original settler of 
Hartford, is that in Rev. David B. Hall's book, and others 
who have erroneously adopted his views. Savage, as keen 
as he was, does not place him in Hartford until 1044, and 
that with no reference whatever to the original settlers. 
Savage ]nust have known that one John Hall was early 
in Hartford, but he did not even so much as venture one of 
his shrewd guesses as to which John Hall it was, and we 
find nothing in Rev. David B. Hall's book to indicate that 
he had any more light on the matter than Savage had. 



18 

In order to show how unreliable the testinit»n> of 
the Kev. Hall is, on this point, we will review some of the 
statements in his book bearin^: thereon. On pa^e 1, he 
says witli reference to John Hall of ]\H(hlletown, that he 
was Freeman, Boston 1G35, probably ''Joined the Hooker 
and Stone colony and went to Hail ford soon after, but 
did not remove his family until IGIJO." 

\Ve do not iind the sliuhtest tiling- to indicate that he 
came to llartfoi'd in ailvance of his family, or tliat he ever 
had any connection of any kind whatever with the Hooker 
and Stone party. This statement is i)robably a conjecture 
based on the fact that one John Hall was in the division of 
1G.3!> and knowing;- that the family of John Hall of ]\Hddle- 
town was in Roxbury until lOSJ), and if he was with them 
he would have been too late in lemoving to Hartford to 
be included in the division of 1G30, it was necessary to 
invent the theoi-y of his coming in advance of the family, 
or some other theory, in order to lay a basis for the claim 
that he was one of the original settlei'S of Hartford. 
By saying this, Mr. Hall practically admits what we have 
herein before claimed, that John Hall of Middletown did 
uot actually remove from Koxbury early enough to be 
considered an original settler of Hartford. 

Again he says on the same page ''Mi-. Hall drew the 
home lot No. 77 of six acres on the brow of Lord's hill 
in IGoi). He also bought lands the same year of Wm. 
Hooker and \Vm. Bloomlield." There was no such thing 
in 1G39 as lot No. 77, nor any other iiuiid)er. This 
number was given the lot iu question l)y ^\'m. S. Porter 
two liundied years after John Hall sold it. I). B. Hall 
must have taken this lot number from Porter's notes, 
and these notes tell him ])lainly that the lot that .Tohn Hall 
drew was not designated by any number. Furthermore 
the only place in Porter's notes where this number appears 
in connection with the name of John Hall, has that name 
in brackets to indicate that the said lot No. 77 was not 
John HalTs home lot iu ]t)tO, because the said John Hall 
had not settled on the lot, or was dead, or had remo\ed 
from town. Thus we see that the very source from which he 
took the lot nund)er told hini that it was not John HalTs 
home lot in iGtO. If he had looked at the records, he 
would have found out that this lot was a two-acre home lot 



11) 

aud not a six-acre home lot. As a general rule, the 
home lots were limited to two acres or less. 

The ''Wm. Hooker" land is a clerical or tyj^ograpliieal 
error for Wm. Ilolten, aud had Mr. Hall read the record 
of this land he would have discovered that this Holten 
lot, instead of lot No. 77, was John Hall's home lot 
''on which his dwelling house standeth." 

His statement that John Hall was a ''surveyor of 
highways in Ilaitford in 1640 " should read 1644. (Hart- 
ford town votes page 75.) 

Again lie savs "In 1650 having sold his house aud 
home lot to Wm. Spencer he removed with his family to 
Middletown." The lot before referred to in Hall's book 
as the home lot, was sold iu 1640 iustead of 1650 as here 
implied, aud from this error in the Rev. D. B. Hall's 
book, many descendeuts of John Hall of Middletown have 
put it iu their family' record that the said John Hall 
lived for ten years on a lot that he never owned, and for 
ten years after any one by the name of Hall had ever 
owned that lot. There is no record to show that John Hall 
of Middletown ever sold a home lot iu Hartford, or a lot 
that had a house on it. Aside from the question of a 
house or home lot, there is no record of the sale of any 
laud iu Hartford by any one bearing the name of John Hall, 
between 1640 and Oct. 28, 1653, when John Hall, Senior, 
sold laud to Thomas Catting, and thus it does not appear 
that he sold any land iu 1650. This review of these state- 
ments shows conclusively that the unsupported statements 
of the author of this book cannot be depended upon iu the 
least, and yet it is believed that all tlie statements ever 
published to the effect that John Hall of jMiddletown was 
one of the original settlers of Hartford, originated with the 
apparent errors of the first page of this book. The only 
fact that could lead any one to suppose that John Hall of 
Middletown was an original settler of Hartford, is that he 
was living there from about 1640 to about 1650. This fact 
is more than offsett in favor of John Hall of New Haven, 
by the grant of 50 acres of land by the Colony of Connecti- 
cut, to the son of John Hall of New Haven and Wal ling- 
ford, in consideration of his father's services in the Pequot 
war of 1637. 



20 

The saino pajjo of "Tho TTalls of Now Eiif^land,'' says^ 
"Sep. 4, Ui'.i'.y, Joliu Hall, John Oldham and tAvo otliers 
started for the Connecticut river, where they were reported 
to be in October/' From the context, D. B. Hall is under- 
stood as claimin<; John Hall of Middletown for tlie 
companion of Oldham. Charles S. Hall, Esqr., argues Mith 
much force that Oldham's companion was John Hall »if 
New Haven. The additional fact not then known, that 
John Hall of Xew Haven was the original "first settler" of 
Hartford, points to him rather than Jdhn of Middletown, 
as the companion of Oldham, They undoubtedly saw 
"SWthersficld on this first expedition and we liave one 
authority besides D. B. Hall as to John Hall being of this 
party. We may reasonably suppose that the lirst John 
Hall to be identified as residing at Ilartford is the one who 
was at Ilartford and Wethersfield in the fall of l(i;i3. and, 
perhaps, again at AVethersfield with Oldham in the fall of 
16.'34, and we have before shown that John Hall of New 
Haven was the first of the name to reside at Hartford. 

"The Eiver Towns of Connecticut," by Charles M. 
Andrews, joages 10 and 11, says "John Oldham who l"or 
many years was a thorn in the flesh for the strait-laced 
colonists, came from England in the Anne in ](iL*.3, ■'^'- '<- ^. 
In 1G31 he became a freeman of the colony, the j^rivilege 
onlv of church members, and in 1632 owned a house in 
Watertowii. This was the man who, early in September, 
1633, started out from the Bay M-ith John Hall and two 
other companions to trade in Connecticut. Plunging boldly 
into the wilderness, so soon to be made historic by a more 
famous emigration, they pursued a winding itinerary in 
order to take advantage of Indian Tillages where they 
might lodge at night." 

"That Oldham and his companions penetrated as far 
south as the then unoeeupied sites of Hart fold and Windsor 
is undoubted, and that lie was the first white explorer of 
the lands still farther south, in the present Wethersfield 
township, further evidence gives good reason to believe. 
* * * For a month after Oldham's return the bark Bless- 
ing, built at Mystic in 1631, explored the coavSts of Connecti- 
cut and Long Island, entered the mouth of the river, and 



21 

appeared at the Dutch Settlement on the Hudson. But if 
the reports of Oldhaui and the sailors of the 'Blessing' were 
favorable to their purpose, those of Hall, who with a few 
others made a second exploration of the valley shortly 
after, must have proved somewhat discouraging." 

Page 13, of the same work, says : 

''There has long been a tradition that a few Watertown 
people came in 1634 to Connecticut and passed a hard 
winter in hastily erected log huts at Pyquag, the Indian 
name of Wethersfield." The colonial records as to the 
settlement of Mr. Oldham's estate, show that he was one of 
these early adventurers at Wethersfield, and there is no 
other record of this fiict. If his companion, John Hall, had 
also been one of these adventurers, there would be no 
record to show it, provided he sold his interest at Wethers- 
field and removed early to Hartford. 

We have been unable to find any early historian that 
gives the name of John Hall as one of Oldham's campan- 
ions, or as an early explorer. Andrews is considered an 
excellent authority, but it is to be regretted that he did not 
cite his authority as to the name John Hall. Winthrop and 
Hubbard appear to be the source from which most writers 
liave drawn their information, but the facts, as given by 
these two historians, as to the early expeditions to Con- 
necticut, have been very confusedly mixed. 

Savage's Winthrop, 1853, pp 128-132, under date Sep. 
4, 1633, says : '' The Grifiin, a ship of three hundred tons, 
arrived. '-!<** The said 4th of September came in also 
the ship called the Bird. ^' * * 

About ten days before this time a bark was set forth 
to Connecticut and those i^arts to trade. 

John Oldham and three with him went over- land to 
Connecticut to trade. The sachem used them kindly, and 
gave them some beaver. ' They brought of the hemp, 
which grows there in great abundance, and is much better 
than the English, He accounted it to be about one hund- 
red and sixty miles. He brought some black lead, where- 
of the Indians told him there was a whole rock. He lodged 
at Indian towns all the way." 



22 

The reference to what they brought back shows that 
this account was written after their return. Being under 
the date of Sep. 4, we should consider tliat as the date the 
expedition started, were it not for the otlier statements 
under the same date. The(jrifiin no doubt arrived on 
that day, and it is specitieally stated tliat the Bird arrived 
''The said Itli of Rei)t('iii]»«'r,"' while the bark sailed about 
ten days before. Tlien follows the account of the Oldham 
expedition without stating any specific date. We therefore 
consider the date indefinite. Sep. 4 may have been the 
date of staiting, or of the return, and perhaps "SVinthrop 
only knew the facts without knowing the exact dates. It 
is probable, liowever, that Sep. 4 was the starting date, as 
nearly as Winthrop could determine. 

On page 14G of the same book, under date Jan. 20, 
1633, (1634 new style,) we find the following : ''Hall and 
the two others, who went to Connecticut Nov. 3, come now 
home, having lost themselves and endured much misery. 
They inlbrmed us that the smallpox was gone as far as any 
Indian plantation was known to the west, and much people 
dead of it, by reason whereof they could have no trade. 



J) 



There is no reference to this expedition in Winthroi^ 
in his account of the previous November. These two ex- 
tracts cleai'ly relate to two diiferent expeditions, and the 
one of Nov. 3 is undoul)tedly the second expedition, 
referred to by Andrews as discouraging. Andrews' book 
is the first, and with the exception of "Hall ancestry," 
page 88, the only work we have found that treats these 
accounts as two distinct expeditions. Most writers errone- 
ously consolidate the facts from both accounts into a 
single expedition. The dates as to the two accounts are 
different, the names and number of the persons are differ- 
ent, one tells of trade and no small-pox, the other of much 
small-pox and no trade ; in short, aside from going over- 
land, not a single fact in either account corresponds with 
anything stated as to the other. That the second expedition 
was over-land may be inferred, although it is not so stated. 

Hul)bard's History of New England, as printed in the 
Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Vol. V. 
Second series, pp 169-170, says: '*In the begining of Septem- 



23 

ber, 1633, when the ship Griffin arrived here * * * some 
were by special providence directed to travel an hundred 
miles westward into the country as far as the river Con- 
necticut, * ^ * by name John Oldham * * * and Sam- 
uel Hall, who died lately about Maiden in Essex, scil. 
about the year 1680, with two others who taking a view of 
the country discovered many very desirable places upon 
the same river fit to receive many hundred inhabitants." 

The will of this Samuel Hall is published in the IST. E. 
H. & G. Register, Vol. XLVII, p 508, with a note show- 
ing that he lived for a time at Ipswich, Mass. Hubbard 
was the minister at Ipswich, and no doubt identified 
Samuel Hall as one of the explorers of 1633, by tradition. 
His account says nothing about the date of return, while 
the date given for the expedition, and placing Oldham as 
the leader, clearly points to the first expedition, noted by 
Winthrop as the one to which this Samuel Hall belonged. 
Hubbard has been called a careless writer, and may not 
have applied his tradition properly to the facts, but it is 
believed that all subsequent accounts that name Samuel 
Hall as an explorer of Connecticut have been based upon 
Hubbard. At the same time some of them contradict 
Hubbad. Savage's Dictionory Vol. 2, p. 337, clearly places 
Samuel Hall in the second expedition, while the note to 
his will by the editor of the Register says he went with 
Oldham and returned Jan. 20, 1633-4, thereby consolidat- 
ing the two expeditions in one. Numerous other authorities 
have the same matter more or less confused. 

In Savage's Winthrop, p 210, under Jan., 1635, there 
is an account of one person going by land to Connecticut 
and returning safely, thus making three over-land expedi- 
tions to Connecticut before the Hooker party. 

All accounts agree that John Oldham and others went 
over-land to Connecticut early in the fall of 1633. Hub- 
bard says one of these ''others" was Samuel Hall. 
Andrews says one was John Hall. If both of these Halls 
were of the party there would, according to Winthrop, still 
be one more whose name is unknown, while one Hall and 
two others went on the second expedition to Connecticut 
late in the fall of 1633. Hubbard, by assigning Samuel 



24 

Hall to the Oklhain expedition, excludes him from the second 
expedition, althon^h late writers ha\'e ]»laoed him theic, 
Andrews clearly recoj^nizes the account of the two differ- 
ent expeditions of 1G33 as j^iven by "\\'inthrop, and places 
John Hall in the first expedition, his reference to "Hall" 
and others in the second exjiedition, in this connection, 
implies that the same John jiall was in that expedition 
also. Everything points to John Hall of New Haven, 
rather than John Hall of Middletown, as the explorer of 
1G.)3. A i)ait of the Hooker Company arrived at Cam- 
bridge in H)'.V2, and some who came then were, with John 
Hall, made freemen at Boston, May 14, 1634. A large 
uuml)er of the ])assengers of the Griffin and the Bird were 
also made freemen the sanu' <lay. We have reason to be- 
lieve that he came with the ad\ance Hooker party in l<)3l2, 
or, perhaps, on the GriHin or tlie iiird, Se]). 4, l(i33 ; 
according to Aiub'ews he was in the first exjiloring mid 
trading expedition to Hartford and Wethersfield in 1()33, 
perhaps he was also in the second expedition of that year ; 
he came with the advance settlers to Wethersfield in the 
fall of 1()34, or to Hartford in the fall of 1G35 ; went to the 
Pequot war from Hartford in 1<)37 ; Joined the New Jlaven 
Colony in 1039 or 40 ; and finally became one of the found- 
ers of Wallingford, Conn., where he died in 167(5. 

Having sold all his land at Hartford in 1640, we find 
John Hall i-emoving to New Haven practicallj' at the same 
time, or so nearly so as to make his selling out at Hartford 
and planting himself in New Haven, one transaction. His 
life in New Haven and Wallingford cannot be better told 
than in the "Hall Ancestry" by Charles S. Hall, Esqr., and 
as we have compared his account with the New Haven 
Colonial records and find it correct, we copy therefrom as 
follows, begining with p. 89. 

"Having made a permanent settlement in New Haven, 
John Hall mari-ies there the young English girl, Jeanne 
Wollen, Mho, for more than thirty years, made him a true 
and faithful wife. She wa.s well educated and of good 
descent, her family being entitled to bear the crest, *a 
demilion, between its paws a cushion, tasselled.' The 
preci.se date of the marriage is uncertain. It was ])e fore 
July 3, 1644, for the records of the court of that date show 
'that John Hall demanded three pounds due him from 



25 

l\oger Knap in the right of his wife, which he did acknow- 
ledge, whereupon it w;is ordered that he should pay three 
pounds, only abating fourteen shillings which he hath done 
in work for John Wollen, brother to the said John Hall's 
wife.' This John Wollen, who probably came over with 
Wilkes, was an Indian trader and interpreter in the 
employ of Captain George Lamberton, with whom he was 
imprisoned by the Swedes on one of his voyages to Dela- 
ware Bay, where the New Haven Colony had considerable 
trade. The fact that at the meeting of the town in 1641, 
for 'casting lots for east meadows and the meadows on Mill 
river, John Hall drew a lot on the bank side by the West 
Creek,' would be in point if married men only could hold 
land, but this was not the case. If he had been married iu 
1643, his name with the number in his family should have 
appeared on the list of planters for that year, but the list 
is not entirely complete. When Jeanne came out with the 
Wilkes, they not only paid her passage, but promised her an 
allowance each year and a marriage portion in case she 
would stay with them for five years, which she agreed to 
do and had done when they all removed to Kew Haven. 
This portion was to have been paid down immediately 
upon her marriage, and the fact that it was not is some 
evidence that she was not married until after Mr. Wilkes 
had gone to England, which Mr. Savage supposes was 
about 1644, as is known by will of his wife, 12th January, 
1646, 'called to go to him but not knowing wether he is 
living or not.' Upon the settlement of the Wilkes' estate 
in 1647, Mr. Hall presented a claim in favor of his wife for 
the amount of this portion, which, after hearing proof, was 
allowed by the court. Payne testified that the first time 
he had heard Mr. Wilkes mention this matter was in 
Boston ; and Bridget Wilkes, his niece, who probably 
came out with the family, said that she had heard her 
uncle, Mr. Wilkes, promise this portion to Jeanne. Mr. 
Marsh testified that Mr. Wilkes 'a little before he went to 
England, declared to him that he had promised Jeanne a 
portion,' and it appears from his further testimony that at 
the time he referred to by 'a little before,' Jeanne was still 
unmarried. These facts seem to point to some time in 
164.3 or early in 1644 as the time of the marriage, but it 
mav have been earlier.'' * * * * 



20 

''John Hall appears to have continued to make it his 
home in XeM- Haven up to the time of his removal to 
Wallin<;for{l, a period of about thirty years. He first 
appears on the records of the town as a signer of the 
Planter's Agreement, June 4, 1()3!». In 1G41 he drew a lot 
on Mill river, and at a subse(iuent division of lands two 
lots were assigned him. June 5, 1G44, he is recorded as 
delivering into court a will and inventory of one John 
Owens, he being the executor. July 1, 1()44, he took the 
oath of allegiance at the General Court. The same month 
he had his suit, in which he recovered judgment against 
Roger Knap. At the General Court, March 16, 1645, he 
with others, 'upon their requests and their occasions being 
made known to the Court, had leave to dejjart the Court.' 
July 4, 1648, he was complained of, with William Holt, for 
absence fi-om the General Court ; his answer was that they 
'had no warning and went out in the morning before the 
drum lieate and knew of no coui-t. For both the Court 
passed it without line.' February 14, 1647, he 'acquaint- 
ed the Court that the highway against a lot he bought of 
Henrj^ Pecke was worn away with water, that there was no 
safe passage that way, and propounded to know whether 
the town will mend it.' But he e^•idently did not think 
the lot worth the expenses of repairing the road, for when 
the Court 'declart d themselves that the order was that 
every man nraintain a suflicient waye two rods from his 
home lot throughout the town,' after mucli debate, he 're- 
signed the lot to Lieutenant 8eely upon condition that he 
mend and maintain the waye.' In 1647 and l(i4S he Avas 
prosecuting his claim against the estate of William Wilkes. 
In 164S he appears as a tenant of the 'Oyster Sliell Field.' 
In 1665, being then in his sixtieth year, he was 'freed from 
training.' 

"During his thirty years residence in New Haven, John 
Hall witnessed the evolution of a thriving commercial 
town from the little colony he had assisted in ])lanting in 
the midst of an unbroken wilderness. What he was en- 
gaged in during all these years, to provide means for the 
support and education of his growing family, we do not 
certainly know. l)ut sons had a money value in those days, 
and he was fortunate in the i)ossession of so uumy. He 
owned lands and, doubtless, with the assistance of his sous 



27 

improved and cultivated them. But he docs not seem to 
have been a large land owner, nor planting to have been 
his principal employment. From the fact of his name 
appearing so infrequently upon the records and his not 
occupying any public position, it would appear that he 
was absent much of the time from New Haven ; for it was 
only those who settled down upon their lands and interest- 
ed themselves in the affairs and held the little offices of the 
town and church that we find very prominent in the early 
records. One of his sons * * * exchanged his possess- 
ions in New Haven for property in New Loudon, a large 
part of the inhabitants of which were sea-faring men, 
where he probably became a vessel owner. The probable 
inference from these facts, is that John Hall Mas in trade, 
perhaps with the Indians for furs, and that later on his 
ventures required his absence much of the tiiue from his 
home. This accords with the supposition that he explored 
the Connecticut country with John Oldham, and after- 
wards conducted a second expedition thither for the 
purpose of trade, and accounts for his readiness to enlist 
in the Pequot war, which furnished a fine opportunity for 
observing the country, and in part for his settling in New 
Haven, which was founded as a commercial town. 

''John Hall was one of the original proprietors of Wall- 
ingford, and removed there with three of his sons in 1G70. 
He was then sixty-five years of age, and his sons, v.ho 
accompanied him, John, about twenty-four, Samuel, 
twenty-two, and Thomas, twenty-one. The first Walliiig- 
ford planters entered into a written covenant, November 
30, 1669, to which are signed the names of John, Samuel, 
and Thomas. David settled there later and the fiist we 
hear of him is in 1680. John and Samuel were married. 
These two we find, as the time rolls on, becoming very prom- 
inent in the affairs of Wallingford. John was the first 
deacon of the church, selectman in 1675, and deputy to the 
General Com-t at Hartford in 1687. Samuel was captain 
of the trainband, as military comi^anies were called at that 
time, a position of great honor and responsibility, open as 
were these little settlements at all times to raids of hostile 
bands of Indians. In 1671 the little village had 100 in- 
habitants, consisting of forty-three proprietors and their 
families. To each of these families, including those of 



28 

John, Samuel, and Thomas Hall, were assigned certain 
wood and meadow lands. In 1G89 we heai' of John and 
Samuel as of a committee to call Rev. Samuel Whittelsey 
as pastor. The only record respecting John Hall, Sen., 
that we find, excepting that of his appointment as deacon 
of the church, and selectman of the town in 1075, the year 
before his death, is where, on the 15th of February, 1075, 
the town voted 'That there had been consent about 
establishing a church of Christ in the aforesaid town, and 
a solemn day set apart and observed by the town, unani- 
mously, to seek God's guidance in so great a work ; they 
have now also actually and unanimously concluded if it he 
the will of God, that there shall be a church gathered, and 
to walk according to the Congregational way ; and have 
also unanimously left the management of the same in the 
hands of Mr. Moss, Mr, Samuel Street (the first minister), 
Mr. Biocket, Eliasaph Preston, John Hall, Sen., Jolm 
Hall. Jun., Thomas Yale and (six others) ; that if it be 
the will of God to incline their hearts, so many of them as 
may be a conpeteut number for that work, may. in his 
time, lay the foundation.' (A green mound in the sand 
plain on the west side of the railroad about a mile below 
Walling-ford depot, now marks the spot Avhere the first 
church in Wallingford was erected.) The establishment 
of a chuicli was regarded in those days as the most import- 
ant act Mhich could possibly engage the attention of the town, 
and for that reason the committee to which the matter was 
entrusted would be made up of the very best and wisest of the 
citizens, and their names, according to the universal 
custom, would be mentioned in the order of their suj)posed 
social rank. This custom gives us a hint of the standing of 
the Halls in Wallingford at that time. The minister and 
master have precedence, of course, but Pieston and the 
Halls, both senior and junior, precede the renmining seven 
of the committee. In New England, marriage outside of 
one's social grade, was then, and ever since has been, un- 
common. For this leason the marriage connections of a 
family have always beeii taken as an index of its condition 
in life. Later on we find that Mary Street, the minister's 
daughter, who from that fact was not regarded as common 
clay, married John Hall's grandson, Hon. John Hall ; and 
his granddaughter, Elizabeth, daughter of his son Samuel, 
married John Moss, the grandson of Mr. Moss of the 
committee." 



29 

John Hall's name appears in the appendix to the 
catalogue of the first church of New Haven as having joined 
in 1646, while that of his wife is put down as having joined 
in 1647. His two first children, John and Sarah, are in tlie 
church records as baptized Aug. 9, 1646, and the same two 
children are again entered as baptized May 24, 1(»47 . Savage 
disbelieves this second record, and it is evidently a 
mistake. The son John was at least two years old when 
he was baptized in 1646, as is shown by the fact that 
Anthony Elcocks and John Hall, Junior, were sued by 
Francis Browne in the town court at New Haven, March 
5, 1666-7, ''In an Action of the case for ye loss of a Boats 
canooe & grajDnell '■'^ * * to ye Damage of five pounds," 
and at the same court John Hall Junior brought suit 
against Wm. Bradley ''In an action of the case for unjust 
delaying of an award given by arbitration," (New Haven 
Town Records, Votes, &c., Vol. 3, p. 16.) He must have 
been 21 in order to sue and be sued, and the arbitra- 
tion shows that he was in litigation some time before, 
whereby he could not have been less than 22 years old in 
1666, and, therefore, was born about 1644. From this we 
may infer that the date of John Hall's marriage is not far 
from 1643, and we know that the sou John, baptized iu 
1646, lived to grow up, so that it is not probable that 
another son of the same name was bai)ti;;ed in 1647, or that 
the same son was baptized a second time. 

Besides the land of John Hall as given in the New 
Haven Colony records, we find that he applied for "some 
meddow at the pine river" at a meeting of the Townsmen, 
Feb. 21, 1651. (Vol. 3, p. Sa.) The land records prior 
to 1679 are without any index, the only record of them 
being mixed in with town votes, &(■., which must be 
read through by course in order to follow all the land of 
any one person. Inasmuch as he left New Haven about 
1670 to 1674, our record of his land is considered incom- 
plete. He was a "viewer offences" on Feb. 8, 1664, and 
again May 1, 1665. (New Haven Eecords, Vol. 3, pp. 64- 
aiid 66.) 



30 

It has been thouj;ht that he removed to Wallingford 
with his sons about 1G7(), and he certainly was one of the 
oii.uiiial ])ropiietors of Wallinj^ford, but prol)ably lie re- 
luaint'd in >i'l'\v Haven for a lime after ha\'ing- arran<;ed, in 
l«i70, for his removal to Wallin<rford. On Oct. 4. 1G70, his 
three sons, Thomas, Jonathan, and Da\id, were before the 
court for the l)oy-like act of making '*a great noyse" in 
frniit of the constal)les house "in ye night after ve 
Sablxith." (New Haven Records, Vol. 3, p. 143.) Tliis 
shows what good children they were to restrain their noisy 
tendencies until their Sunday was over. 

At a Xew Haven town meeting Dec. 15, 1673, Mr. 
Jones acquainted ye town that there was no constable that 
''would accept tS: take ye oath'' and John Gibbs refused to 
accept. ''Then John Hall also being called to know his 
answ^ declared his refusal." (Town Records, Vol. 3, p. 
175.) On June 20, 1674, at the New Haven County Court 
'Mno Hall Senr. of Xew Haven appeared to answei- for his 
refusing ye office of constable wn chosen thereunto, there 
being some of ye members of ye Court gone & others in 
haste to be gone, it was referred unto another court." 
(County Court Records, Vol. 1, p. 78.) This Court record 
evidently refers to the refusal of the year before. Xo 
record is fouiul of any further action by the court. Al- 
though he practically removed to Wallingford about 1670, 
and may have resided there a part of the time, these 
records indicate that he retained a residence in Xew 
Haven until about 1674. 

The date of John Hall's birth as about 1605, is 
estimated fi-om the following record of a town meeting at 
Kew Haven. Oct. 9, 1665. ''John Hall Senr. declaring 
himself to be above sixty years of age & thereupon desired 
to be freed from trayning, which was, granted to him 
provided that ye law noM' doe allow it." (Town records, 
Vol. 3, p. 74.) It is not likely that he was then "above" 
sixty one years of age, and therefore must have been born 
after Oct.'s, 1604, and before Oct. 9, 1605. 

John Hall died, probably, not long before May 3, 1676. 
when the inventory of his estate was taken by Xath" 
Merriman and Eliasaph Preston, the same amounting to 
£189. 5. 5. 



31 

This inventory and his ^vill are recoided in Kew 
Haven Probate, Vol. 1, part 2, page 58, the will being as 
follows — 

''John Hull Senr. of Wallingford, his hist will 
niicupative. Testimony of Mr. Sanifl. Street, SaniH. Hall 
& Mary Hall saith That about ye time Good^ Hall fell sick 
they heard him say and he said it to them that he doubted 
not of his wives love & care of his children & therefore he 
would leave ye dispose of his whole estate to his wife not 
questioning but his children would be well Satisffyed 
therewith" 

Mr. Samuel Street was the minister of Wallingford 
and Samuel Hall was John Hall's son. Until recentiv, the 
wife of John Hall's son John was the only Mary Hall 
that could be thought of, and she was supposed to be the 
third witiiess to this will, but it now appears that John 
Hall, senior, had a daughter Mary who was not married in 
1<)76, and it is much more probable that his own unmarried 
daughter Mary would have been with him in his last 
sickness, than that his daughter-in-law should have been 
there ; hence we suppose that his own daughter Mary is 
the Mary Hall of record as one of the witnesses to this will. 

As with all estates between 166G and 1712, the court 
orders relating thereto are found in the K^ew Haven 
County Court records, and not at the Probate Office. In 
Vol. 1, page 91, under the date June 14, 1676, is this 
entry: "A writing as the last will «& testament nuncupa- 
tive of John Hall Senr., late of Wallingford deceased 
exhibited in court and upon oath of the witnesses approved 
for record. Also an Inventory of the Estate of the sd 
John Hall Exhibited in court & upon oath of the widdow 
and appisers approved for record." 

The widow, Jane Hall, married John Cooper, Senr., 
in about three years after Mr. Hall's death. As the sole 
executrix of her deceased husband's last will and testament 
(John Hall), she deeds land to Thomas Hogg on the 18th 
day of Dec, 1678, at which time she signed her name as 
Jane Hall. The deed was acknowledged March 25, 1679, 
at which time she is described as ''The above said Jane 
Hall, (now Jane Cooper,)" thus showing that she was 



32 

luarried to Mr. Cooper some time between the date of sign- 
ing the deed, and its acknowledgement. (New Haven 
Land records, copy, Vol. la page 8.) That her second 
husband was John Cooper, Senr., is probable from the fact 
that he was the only Mr. Cooper, known in that vicinity, of 
a suitable age to have married Mrs. Hall, and also from 
the fact that she removed to New Haven, where John 
Cooper, Senr., resided. This is shown by a deed in the 
Wallingford land records, Vol. 1, p. 25, wherein Jane^ 
Cooper of New Haven, gives land in Wallingford, to her 
son David Hall. This deed was executed at New Haven, 
Jan. 21, 1()80, and Avitnessed by Thomas Yaile, Senr., and 
John Cooper, Junior. That her husband was John Cooper, 
Senr., is also shown by the following County court record, 
as is also the fact that she was living at New Haven in 
March 27, 1G90. Vol. 1, p. 175. 

''An Inventory of the estate of John Cooper Senior 
late of New Haven deceased intestate exhibited & prooved 
& soe approved for record. Jane Cooper widdow «S: relict 
of the sd deceased renouncing in court the Administration: 
this court doe grant the administration unto John Cooper 
the only son of the deceased : And orders letters of Ad- 
ministration to be given him, he giving in bond according 
to law. 

'The widdow ordered to have the thirds both of the 
real & personal estate, the real estate only during her 
natural life & the personal estate her owne to dispose of as 
she please. And ye widdow was allowed thirty shillings 
out of the estate in reference to famih' expenses before ye 
estate was settled. 

"The children seemed to be agreed about ye dividing 

of the rest of the estate." 

This is the last record found of Jane Cooper, alias- 
Hall, alias Wollen. She died some time in the year 1600, 
between Marrh 27th and Nov. 14th, the date of an agree- 
ment between her heirs, in Avhich it is distinctly stated 
that John Hall and Jane Hall were both then deceased. 
Miss K. A. Prichard, of AVaterbnry, Conn., a descendant 
of Henry Cook, first called our attention to this agree- 



33 

meut which is recorded in Vol. 1, p. 48G, Ncav Haven land 
records, and is as follows : — 

''This writting- made this 14th day of November, 
Anno, lOi.'U. Witiiesselli that \ve whose names are nnder- 
writteu being the childern and successors of the late Jolm 
Hall and Jauo Hall, late of New Haven & Wallinglord 
do firmly agree and conclude upon the following articles 
and conclusions referring to the distribution of llie estate 
of the said John Hall and Jane Hall bitth deceased. 

"Imprimis, it is agreed by the said underwritten 
persons that John, Thomas, Samuel and David liall being 
possessed of a certain parcell of meadow which was the 
property of the said John Hall, our lather, that they do 
still hold and posses the same according to the breadth 
they now posses all that and next the river which said 
parcel of meadow is in the boundary of New Haven in 
that place called the Island in the east meadows and to be 
and remain to them us and each of us our heirs and 
assigns. 

" Item, that Henry Cook do also hold and posses eleven 
acres of land be it more or less within the boundary of 
Wallingford which was also the property of the said John 
Hall which is already in his possession and improvement 
to be to him and his heirs and assigns forever, also that 
John Hall shall have a cow and half a mare in partnership 
with his brother Samuel with more they are to take in the 
woods. 

" Item, that Samuel have the other half of the said 
mare. 

" Item, that Thomas shall have three sheep, a coverlet, 
eight yards of cloth already agreed about. 

"Item, that Henry Cook shall have a bed and bolster 
which was our own mother's and a cow, these several lands 
goods and chattels to be unto each of the said persons in 
addition to what they have already received without being 
accountable to us or any other person for the same. 

"Item, that William Johnson hold and posses in like 
manner what he hath now in possession of the estate be- 
longing in any way to our said father or mother he paying 
the just debts now legally appearing. 



34 

"Item, tliat Samuel shall Iia\«', hold and posses a 

•certain parcel of land also within the boundary of Walling- 

ford which was also belonging to our said father being 

about thirty-six acres more or less to be unto hini his 

heirs or assigns forever. 

' 'In witness and conlinuation of all the above and before 
written premises we have hereunto put to our hands and 
seals the day and year before written. Signed, sealed and 
delivered. 

"JOHN HALL 

'^SAMLL HALL 

^'in the presence "WM. JOHNSON 

his t mark 



"Jeremiah Osborn. "DAVID HALL # 

"Samll Leek." "HENIJY COOK 

his t mark 



a 



THOMAS HALL 



i" 



It is noted that the son, Jonathan, did not sign and is 
not represented in this agreement, but evidently he had in 
some way received his share in his father's estate an;l, as 
hereiualter shown, his children sell the land in Walling- 
ford that came or might come to them through their 
grandfather, John Hall. William Johnson and Henry 
Cook are both treated as sons, but the names of their 
wives are not mentioned. It is known, however, that 
"William Johnson married John Hall's daughter Sarah, 
(New Haven Land, Vol. 1, p. 32,) and that Henry Cook's 
wife was Mary. The facts hereinafter given in connection 
with this Mary, prove conclusively that she was John 
Hall's daughter and Henry Cook's first and only wife. 

An exhaustive study of the Wallingford land records 
would no doubt reveal the sale of land from all of John 
Hall's children or their heirs, that came to them through 
him and which included land granted to his heirs after his 
death ; in one instance more than fifty years after ; viz. 
Nov. 28, 1728, when "there is layed out for ye Ancient 
John Hall's heirs, ninteen acres." (Wallingford Land, 
Book G, p. 08.) Similar grants were made to such of his 



35 

sons as resided at Walliiigfoi-d^ for examj^le, the Town 
granted land to Deacon John Hall in 1671, 1072, 1073, 
1083, 1087, 1092, 1094, 1701, and 1704. (Wallingford 
Laud, Book 1, pp. 120, 121, and 182.) 

Davis' History of Wallingford, 1870, erroneously 
gives John Hall a sou Kichard, born July 11, 1045, but 
there is no birth or baptism of any such son. There was 
a Richard Hall at New Haven who died Feb. 3, 1725-6, 
age 54, leaving a widow Hannah, and children, as stated 
by Davis, excepting that his son John was born in 1704, 
instead of 1714. This Eichard Hall, however, was not 
born in 1045, as stated iu Davis, but in 1072 as shown by 
the Middletown records and by his tomb stone which, witli 
that of his wife, Hannah, stands by the Avest wall in the 
Grove Street Cemetery at New Haven. (New Haven 
Historical Society Papers, Vol. iii, p. 520.) He was the 
son of Captain John^ and Elizabeth (Cornwell) Hall of 
Middletown, (Richard,'-' John.i ) His first deed of land in 
New Haven is dated May 7, 1703. In this deed he is de- 
scribed as "Rich«^ Hall of Middletown, * * * now Resident 
in new haven, marriur," (New Haven Land, Vol. 2, p. 
182.) Captain John Hall of Middletown, father of Rich- 
ard, bought land in Wallingford, Oct. 2, 1703. (Walling- 
ford Land, Book 1, p. 291.) He gave this land to his 
grandson, Samuel Hall, the son of his son, Richard, by his 
will dated Nov. 23, 1711, recorded at Wallingford, 1725. 
(Land, Book 5, p. 9.) This will and the Middletown 
records show that the said John Hall also had a son Giles. 
On Feb. 0, 1718-19, ''Richard Hall, marriner of New 
Haven" deeds land to ''his brother Giles Hall of Middle- 
town, Marriner." (Middletown Land, Vol. 4, p. 18.) 
These facts conclusively prove that Richard Hall of New 
Haven belongs to the Middletown Halls, and not to the 
Wallingford Halls. Davis' error is repeated 1883, by 
Rev. D. B. Hall, in his Halls of New England, and he adds 
another son, Daniel, of New Haven to the list of John 
Hall's children. This Daniel Hall married and had child- 
ren, per New Haven records, as stated by D. B. Hall, 
(except for errors in the date of birth of the last two 
children) but there is no record of either the birth or 
baptism of any such son and not a scrap of evidence is 
found to connect him with John Hall of New Haven and 



36 

Wallinj^loid, nor with the Middlctown family of Halls. 
His name does not appear at all on the Kew llaven land 
records proper, and the only reference found to any land 
of his land is Nov. 7, 1674, when he asks the town for the 
grant of a ])iece of land of ''about IS or 20 feet to set a 
ware house upon at ye southward of ye warehouse" of his 
brother, Trowbridge. (Town Eecords, Vol. 3, p. 180.) 
About the only fact bearing,'- on his foi'nier residence is as 
follows : 'Manies Russell servant to Jno Tomson of 
Sown-end dyed ye 27 of July 1674; This Eussell lately 
came from Ireland with Danyell Hall. MrofyeSarahe 
Hud.iisin." (Vol. 2, p. 59, New Haven Births. Deaths & 
Marriages.) This record and the failure to connect him 
with any other Hall family, indicate that he was an in- 
dependent emigrant who first came to New Haven about 
1670, as Master of a ship, and made a home for his family 
there while he continued his occupation as mariner until 
he died at Barbadoes, 1675. It is believed that many 
persons, relying upon the works of Davis and D. B. Hall, 
have been lead into error as to Richard and Daniel, whose 
record is here given to enable their descendants to know 
that they do not belong to John and Jane (Woolen) Hall. 

The following genealogy, especially with reference to 
the first few generations, has been very carefully prepared, 
mainly from original records. 



GENEALOGY. 




1. John Hall, b. about 1G05, d. before May 3, 1G76, 
aged 71, m. Jane Woolen. 

Children. Baptisms from New Haven Church 
icords, the births of J( 
New Haven town records. 



records, the births of Jonathan and David from 



2. 


1. 


45. 


11. 


4. 


iii 


5. 


iv. 


6. 


V. 


7. 


VI. 



John, 2 bapt. Aug. 9, 1646, in. Dec. 6, 1666, Mary Parker. 
Sarah, liapt. Aug. 9, 1646, m. Dec, 1664, Wingle Johnson. 

John and Sarah are again entered on the New Haven 

Church records as ])apt. jNIay 24, 1647, but Savage saVvS 

he does not 1>eUeve it. 
Samuel. )japt. May 21, 1648, m. Mav, 1668, Hannah 

Walker. 
Thomas, bapt. March 25, 1649, m. June 5, 1673, Grace 

Watson. 
Jonathan, b. April .5, 1651. 
David, b. March 18, 1652, m. Dec. 24, 1676, Sarah Eock- 

well. 
8. vii. Mary, b. about 1654, m. Henry Cook. 

'. John- Hall, (John,'^ ) b. about 1644, bapt. Aug. 
9, 1646, d. Sept. 2, 1721, m. Dec. 6, 1666, Maiy, 
dau. of Edward and Elizabeth (Wid. Potter,) 
Parker of New Haven, Conn., bapt. Aug. 27, 1648. 
She d. Sept. 22, 1725. He became the first deacon 
of the church of Wallingford ; was selectman in 
1675 ; and was deputy to the General Court held in 
Hartford, 1687. His occupation is repeatedly given 
in the land records as ^'Turner" while his brother 
Samuel is called "Disturner" and his brother David 
* 'Turner," "Disturner" and "Dishturner" meaning 
a lathe-worker in wood. One of the descendants of 
John Hall has a silver spoon marked ''John and 
Mary Hall." There is no probate record of his 
estate, but an agreement between his heirs is record- 
ed on Wallingford Land Eecords, Book 3, p. 526. 
"Daniel Hall, Nathi Hall & John Hall, Elizabeth, 



38 

Maiy, lidea & estor, Natli' Judd, Gcorj^e Pafje & 
l)('ii()iiy Adkiiis, cdiildien ; li'^atccs to ye estate of 
Deaeon John Hall, late of ^\'al]ingloI■d, deceased. 
Do agree yt. as to the settlement of sd estate : our 
irononi'ed father ha\ing in his life time gi\(-n all 
his lands, his eloath & his tools to his sons, namely 
Daniel, Nath" & John Halls.'- the four daughters 
are to have the remaining movables except certain 
movables ''shall be left with oui- honoi-ed mother 
* * * during her life time." dated Feb. 24, 1722, 
and signed by Daniel Hall, Nathaniel flail, Jdhn 
Hall, George Page, Nathaniel Judd, Benony Adkins 
& Elizabeth Ifall. 

Children from Xew Haven & Wallingford towu 
records. 

i. a child/' b. 1667. 

ii. Ei.izAHETii, b. Awr. 11, 1670, d. 1735, unmarried in Feb., 
1722. ])ut after that in. a Mr. Ferris. Adni. "estate of 
Elizabeth Ferris, alias Hall, Late of Wallingfonl Deed 
granted to Daniel Hall of sd Wallingford brother to ye sd 
deceased" AuL^ 7, 1735. (New Haven Probate, Vol. 6, 
p. 170.) 
9. iii. Daxiki., h. Feb 26, 1672. ni. March 15, 1693, Thankful 
Lyman. 

iv. i\L\RY, b. June 28, 1675, ni. George Page. 

10. V. Natii.vxiel, b. Feb. 8, 1677, ni. May 11, 1699, Elizabeth 

Curtiss. 

11. vi. John, 1). :\Larch 14, 1681, m. June 2S, 1707, Elizabeth 

Ko\se. 
vii. Lyo"[a, }). Jan. 21, 1683, ni. .March 24, 1708, Nathaniel 

Judd: 
viii. Samuel, b. Dec. 24, 1686, d. Nov. 1, 1689. 
ix. EsTiiKK, b. Aug. 30, 1693, ni. Aug. 20, 1715, Benoni 

Adkins, son of Thomas, b. 1690. 

3. Sar.\h'- Hall, (John,'^ ) \y<\\)t. at New Haven, 
Aug. 9, 1646, m. Dec , 1664, Wingle Johnson of 
New Haven, supposed to have been the son of 
Thomas, who Avas drowned in New Haven harbor 
1640. He was also known as William, although 
called "Wingle" in the New Haven records of 
births, &c., and sometimes in the land record.s. He 
was one of the oiiginal proprietors of Walliiigford, 
Conn., but nevei' lived there. He sold his land there 
''with ye consent of Sarah" his ''wife" to Isaac 
Curtiss, Jan. 20, 1694, both signing the deed by 



30 

their niai-k. (Walling ford Land, Book 1, p. 282.) 
This is the last record we have of lier. Hon. Kalph 
Smyth gives him a second wife, Abigal, l)ut his first 
wife was the mother of all his childi-en. Both wives 
probably died before he made his will which does 
not mention any wife. His will was filed Aug. 6, 
1716, (New Haven Probate, Vol. 4, p. 450.) and 
names sons William, Isaac, John, Samuel, Ebenezer, 
and Jacob ; daughters, Mary Bishop, Abigal Lines, 
Sarah Horton, Lydia Andrews, and p]lizabeth 
Hotchkiss. Inventory recorded on same page, 
taken Jan. 7, 17L6-17. Amt. £70. IS. 2. 

Children. 

i. LiEX'T. WiLLi.\.M,3 b, Sept. 5, 1665, d. in 174:.', leaving 
willow Sarah, four ?on8 and three married daughters. 
(New Haven Probate, Vol. 6, p. 446.) 

ii. Joiix, ]>. July 20, 1667, d. 1744, ni. Abigail, dau. Daniel 
and Abiah (Street. ) Sherman, b. Aug. 5, 1667. Three 
children, (Street Family, p. 15.) 

iii. ABKAiTAjr, b. 1668-9. Not named in his father's will. 

iv. Abig.\l, 1). Dec. 6, 1670, m. March 30, 1692, Joseph Lines, 
son of Ralph, b. Jan., 1657. 

V. IsA.'ic, of Woodlmdge, Conn., b. Oct. 27, 1672, m. April 
25, 1699, Abitral, (tau. of John and Marv (Tomiison,) 
Cooper, b. Oct. 3, 1679. 

vi. Jacob, b. Sept. 25, 1674, d. July 17, 1749, m. Dec. 14r 
1693, Abigal, dau. of John & Abigal (Merriman, ) Hitch- 
cock. His descendants are given bv F. C. Johnson, M. 
D., in the N. E. H. & G. Register for Oct., 1901. 

vii. Sarah, b. Nov. 6, 1676, m. Samuel Horton. She was a 

widow with Ave children, April 5, 1742. (New Haven 

Probate, Vol. 6, p. 406. ) 
viii. Samuel, 1). Sept. 3, 1678, m. Anna Hotchkiss, dau. of 

Thomas. (New Haven Land, Vol. 10, p. 243.) 
ix. Mary, b. April ], 1680, m. Samuel Bishop, Jr., b. July 

27, 1671. 

X. Lydia, b. July 7, 1681, m. about 1699, Gideon Andrews, 
son of Nathan and Phebe (Gibbard, ) Andrews, b. March 
7, 1679-80. Adm. estate of Mrs. Lydia Andrews, late of 
New Haven, deceased, granted to David Gilbert, Junior, 
of New Haven, Feb., 1767. (New Haven Probate, Vol. 
10, p. 373. ) 

xi. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 11, 1683, d. Feb. 27, 1683. 

xii. Hope, b. May 10, 1685, d. May 25, 1685. 

xiii. Elizabeth, b. May 10, 1685, twin with Hope, m. Abraham 
Hotchkiss, son of Thomas. 



XIV 



40 

]-:i!i;xi:zEK, b. Aj.ril 15. Um, d. at Cheshire, Conn., April 
18, 1/32, m. Lv(ha Ilotchki.ss dan. of Thonia.«. 8he ni 
(2) Sept. 15, 173(>, Nathaniel Hall of Wallinjjforfl. The 
proof (.f parentage of the two Ih.tclikis.^ <.'irl.«, Anna, who 
ni. .Samuel Johnson, and Lvdia, who ni. Ebenezer John- 
pon, .«i.«ters of Abraham Hotchkis.« who m. Elizabeth 
Johnson, No. xni, is found in the New Haven lan.l 
reoonls. Vol. 10, p. 243, where Joseph and Sarah Turner 
Samuel and Anna Johnson, all of New Haven, Nathaniel 
Hall and Lydia Hall, both of Wallin^ford, to Joseph 
Sperry, Jr., "right in estate of our Honored father 
Thomas Hotchkiss deed." 

4.. S-\MUEL'-^ IlALL, {JoJm,' ) bapt. at Xow Haven, :\ray 
21, 16-tG. d. at Wallinfjlbnl, :\Iaicli 5, 1725. aged 
77, m. May, 1688, Hannali. dan. of Jolin and Grace 
Walkor ; she d. Dee. 20, 1728, and was probably b. 
Sept. 20, 1646. Removed to Wallintrford, Conn., 
in 1670, where he beeaine deacon oi" the church' 
(Hall Ancestry, pages 180-186.) His occupation is 
given in the land records in 1713, as ''Disturner.^' 
His grandson Caleb Doolittle, son of his dau. 
Hannah Doolittle, was living witl\ him Marcli 23, 
1823-4, and was to serve him until he was '>l' 
(Wall. Land, Book 4, p. 304.) :N'o probate record.' 

Children. 

12. i. JoHN,3 b. Dec. 26, 1670, m. Dec. S, 1692, Marv Lvman. 

ii. Haxxau b. March 11, 1(173-4, m. April 6, 1697, Ebenezer 
Doolittle. 

iii. Sarah, b. June 20, 1677, d. :\Iarcli 18, 1712. 

13. iv. Samuel, b. Dec. 10, 1680, m. May 2, 1704, Love Rovce. 
V. TiiEopiTiLus, b. Feb. 5, 1686. 

vi. Elizabeth, b. March 6, 1690, m. Feb. 25, 1708, John Moss. 

5. Thomas-' Hall, (John,-^ ) bapt. New Haven, March 
25, 1649. Sergt. Thomas Hall, d. Sept. 17, 1711, 
60th year. (Wallingford records. ) He m. June 5 
1673, Grace, dau. of Edward and Grace Watson! 
Mis. Watson was formerly the wife of John Walker, 
and her dau. Grace Watson was therefore half sister 
to Hannah ^^'alke^, who married Samuel Hall, 
brother of Thomas. She was b. 1653, d. May 1, 
1731. Thomas Hall's marriage is the first to be re- 
corded at Wallingford, but the name of the wife is 



41 

not given. llis occupation is given in tlie land 
records as "Carpenter." His estate was probated 
first Monday of Jan., 1711-12. Adm. to his widow 
Grace, and son Daniel. Distribution, April 10, 
1722. Children's names and ages ai)pended to the 
inventory is as follows: "Thomas, Mary, Jona- 
than, Joseph, Daniell, Eebecca, arrived to full age, 
Israeli Hall, fifteen yeai-s old." (New Haven Pro- 
bate, Vol. 3, p. 311.' Distribution, Vol. 5, p. 164.) 

The surviving children as given below, convey 
interest in his estate to "our brother Jonathan 
Hall," Feb. 20, 1729, and to "our brother Joseph 
Hall," March 14, 1743-4. (Wallingford Land, 
Book 6, p. 274, and Book 10, p. 20.) 

Children. 

Abigal,3 b. Jan. 7, 1674, m. Jan. 14, 1694, John Tyler, 
who received a share, in right of his wife, in the distri- 
bution of Thomas Hall's estate. 

Thomas, b. July 17, 1676, m. April 26, 1710, Abigal 
Atwater. 

Maby, b. Nov. 12, 1677, d. unmarried, 1752. (New Haven 
Probate, Vol. 8, pp. 119 & 134.) 

Jonathan, b. July 25, 1679, m. May 12, 1703, Dinah 
Andrews. 

Joseph, b, July 8, 1681, m. Nov. 13, 1706, Bathia Terrel. 
d. before 1752, leaving son, Ephraim. 

Esther, b. Feb. 23, 1682, d. before 1712. 

Benjamin, b. April 19, 1694, d. before 1712. 

Peter, b. Dec. 28, 1686, d. before 1712. 

Daniel, b. Jan. 27, 1689, m. April 20, 1721, Martha 
Doolittle. 

Rebecca, 1). .Tan. 6, 1691, m. March 2, 1716, Daniel, son 
of Joseph and Elizabeth (French,) Holt, b. Oct. 6, 1687. 

Israel, b. Oct. 8, 1696, m. April 4, 1721, Abigal Powell. 

6. Jonathan'^ Hall, ( John,^ ) b. April 5, 1651. He 
was living with his parents at New Haven Oct. 4, 
1670. There is no further record of him found at 
New Haven. He exchanged his "house & home 
Lot" at New Haven for a "Dwelling house & home 
Lott containing by Estimation an acre" at New 
London with John Stevens "of New London now 
resident at New Haven," March 10, 1676-7, Ack. 
March 10, 16S6. (New London Land, Book 5, p. 
92.) Savage gives the baptism of three children of 



14. 


ii. 




iii. 


15. 


iv. 


16. 


V. 




vi. 




vii. 




viii 


17. 


ix. 




X. 


18. 


xi. 



42 

Jonathan Hall at Xew London, 1670 to 1680. These 
are also o;iven in I)i'. Blake's L;i1« r Tlisloi y of tlie 
first eluneli uf Christ, New Loudon, to which is 
added ''Mrs. Hannah HalPs child, bapt. Oct. 30, 
16!>2," no name. From the fact that liis first dau. 
was Hannah and there Avere no other Halls in New 
Jjondon, this Hannah Hall is thoui^ht to have been 
the wife of Jonathan Hall. On May 23, 1682, 
Jonathan Hall of New London appointed his "Broth- 
er Jno Hall of Walling ford" ■ his attorney to 
answer for him in an action for debt bronght by 
Major Tho. Clarke, of Boston, at the County Court 
of New Haven, but no record of the trial is there 
found, i)resnmably because the case was settled out 
of court. The home lot of one acre, at New London, 
was bounded on the front and rear, or east and west, 
by "a cove," and a warrantee deed of the same was 
given by Daniel Hall to Nathan Morrow, Feb. 11, 
1734, nothing being of record to show how Daniel 
Hall became the owner. A part of the early Pro- 
bate records of New London were ])uined during the 
Revolutionary war. This deed from Stevens shows 
that Jonathan Hall owned a house and home lot at 
New Haven, in 1670-7. but there are practically no 
land records covering that })eriod. We find, however, 
that this John Stevens, on Feb. 8, 1098-9, sold a 
house and home lot, at New Haven, of one acre, the 
same size as the New London lot, and, presunmbly, 
this was the lot he bought of Jojiathan Hall. The 
New London home lot was bounded on two sides by 
a cove, and the New Haven home lot on the "south by 
the sea," both of them being just such a lot as a 
raarriner would be likely to own. On May 21, 1724, 
Daniel Hall, Hannah Lester, widow, and Elizabeth 
Hall of New London, deed to John Hall the third, of 
Wallingford, their ''whole right, laid out, divided 
or unlaid out," in land "whici! descend to us from 
our Grandfather John Hall of Wallingford dec,d." 
{Wallingford Land, Book 4, p. 397.) Daniel Hall 
m. 1710, Elizabeth Mayhew. It is Hionght that 
widow Hannah Lesler named in tlie abo\ e deed was 
the dau. Hannah l)apt. 1083, and that Elizabeth 
Hall was the wife of the .said Daniel. This, taken in 



43 

connection witli tlio sale of Jonathan IlalTs home 
lot by Daniel Hall, leads ns to believe that the said 
Daniel was the son of the said Jonathan, and the 
Wallingford deed above named was the said 
Jonathan's share of land from his fatlicr's estate. 
No son of Johu^ Hall, except Jonathan, is snpposed 
to have had both a son Daniel, and a dan. Hannah. 
The fact that Daniel, alone, sold the only real estate 
of record to Jonathan Hall, is believed to show that 
this Daniel was, in 17.34, the sole snrviving heir of 
Jonathan Hall. Another distinct family of Halls 
appear later on the New London records, but no 
record of any desfendents of Jonathan is found 
of a later date than the sale (f the home lot, in 1734. 

One Jonathan Hall of Saybrook was tin«'d abNew 
London, July 27, 1G90, for setting s sil on the Sab- 
bath, and in the warfare on the northern frontier, 
1697, Jonathan Hall was paid for "himself and 
sloop for ye gunns £3." (History New London, 
pp. 253 and 258.) No record of any Jonathan Hall 
is found iu the town records of Saybrook, Drior to 
1700. 

Children. 

i. JoxATirAX,^ bapt. Oct. 18, 1677. 

ii. Peter, bapt. Oct. 17, 1680. 

ill. Hanxah, bapt. June 17, 1683, was AVidow Lester in 1724. 

iv. Daniel, m. April 24, 1716, Elizabeth INIayhew, dan. of 
John and Johanna (Christopherp, ) Mavhew, b. Feb. 8, 
1683-4, (Historv of New London, p. 336.) had 1. Eliz- 
abeth, bapt. July 3, 1720. 2. Daniel bapt. Feb. 4, 1721. 
No other record of his children, and the last record of 
him is the deed of 1734. 

V. A Child, bapt. Oct, 30, 1692. 

David2 Hall, (t/o7m,i ) b. March 18, 1652 (New 
Haven town records,) d. July 7, 1727, aged 76; he 
resided at Wallingford, m. Dec. 24, 1676, Sarah, 
dau. of John and Sarah (Ensign) Eockwell, b. May 
12. 1653, d. Nov. 3, 1732. David Hall was a 
"Dishturner" (Wallingford land. Book 3, p. 371.) ; 
deeded land to his "cusen Capt. John Hall" 
(nephew), also to his sous in law and daughters 
John Mattune, Theophilus Doolittle, and Nathaniel 



44 

Mt'irinian, Inisbands to Jeinslia, Thankful and 
Mabel. ( Wallin^ford land, Book 2, pp. 740 and 
317, Book 1, p. 521, and Book 4, p. 187.) Hi.s 
estate was probated Sei)t. 4, 1727, Distribution 
April 1, 1728. (Xcm- Haven Probate, Vol. o, pp. 
393 and 429. ) 

Cliildrcii. 

i. Joii.N/' 1). :\Iay 9, 1(578. Not included in the distribution 

of his father's estate. 
ii. TiiANivii'L, b. Dec. 29, 1079, m. Jan 5, 1698-9, Theophilus 

Dnohttle, son of Abraham, b. .Jnlv 28, 1078, d. .Tune 2, 

171o, and he ni. (2) Elizal)eth Howe. (Tuttle Family, 

p. ().^2. ) 
iii. Sakam, 1). Dec. 28, ItiSl, m. April H, lti97. Nathaniel ( 'urtis, 

and d. Sept. 17, 1700, witliuut i.ssue. lli' m. (2) July 9, 

1702, Sarah liow. 
iv. Ri-rii, b. Nov. 10, 1687, d. before 1727. 
V. Jeiu-siia, b. Oct. 28, 1(587, m. Oct. 20, 170(1 Jolm rVlatoon. 
vi. Mahei., b. Aug. 15, 1791. Afterwards called Mehitable. 

m. Nathaniel, son of Samuel and Annah Merriman, b. 

i\Iav 27, 1687. 
vii. David, b. Dec. 1, 1693, d. before 1727. 

Mary2 Hall, ( John} ) b. al)out 1654, m Henry 
Cook, son of Henry and Judith (Birdsale) Cook of 
Salem, Mass., born Dee. 30, 1652 She was living 
at Wallingford with her father- and mother when 
John Hall spoke to her and others his la.st will in 
1676, and was married, probably, at Salem, Sept. 30, 
1678. "Henry Cooke marryed to Mary Hale ye 
last of the 7th mo. 1678." (Salem reeords, from 
Collections Essex Institute, Vol. 2, 43.) Facts 
hereinafter given show that "Hale" in the fore- 
going marriage record was intended for Hall. In 
olden times Hall was spelled "Halle," so that the 
omission of only a single letter renders the name 
Hale and we find this done in the Hartford land 
records before considered, where we know that 
"Hale" was meant for Hall. One Mary Cook, age 
39, died Sept. 4, 1695 (Wallingford records), and 
as she is not accounted for, some have suggested 
that she was this Mary Hale, the first wife of Henry 
Cook, and that Mary Hall was his second wife. 
Henry, son of Henry and Mary, was born 12 years 
before the death of this Mary Cook, so that he would 



45 

not have been the son of a second Mary, but in the 
probate records of t lie estate of widow Mary Cook, 
1718, he is called "her eldest son." This same son 
Henry quit-claims to his brother Isaac, his light in 
the ''homestead which was our mother's Mary 
Cook's, deed, of Wallingford" Aug. 10, 1720. 
(Wallingford land, Book 4. 188.) That the first, 
second, fifth, and eighth of his children were grand- 
daughters of John Hall, and married respectively, 
Jeremiah How, Joseph Preston, Timothy Beach, 
and Adam Mott, is shown by the following : 

We, Jeremiah How ye 2^^ & Mary his wife, 
formerly Cook, both of Wallingford, to Daniel Hall, 
Jr., land that ' 'comes to us on the right of our honored 
grandfather, Mr, John Hall the first of Walling- 
ford & on the right of our honored father Henry 
Cook, late of Wallingford, decsd.", dated March 19, 
1729. (Wallingford land, Book 6, p. 95.) 

"Joseph Preston & Jane my wife, of Wallingford" 
to Daniel Hall, Junior, land "which came by our 
ancestors as yet not layed out" dated Jan. 28, 1724, 
(Wallingford Land, Book 4, p. 520.) 

Timothy Beach & Hannah Beach, both of Wall- 
ingford to our brother Isaac Cook of Wallingford, 
"all our right that we should or might have in or to 
the seventh division of land * * * that shall or 
may accrue to us on our grandfather Hall's right & 
our father Henry Cook's right ; " dated May 24, 
1734. (Wallingford Land, Book 7, p. 141.) 

Adam Mott & Elizabeth Mott, wife to Adam Mott 
of^ Wallingford, to Samuel Hall, "in right of my 
wife Elizabeth" laud that "descends to us from our 
father Henry Cook of sd Wallingford & half an acre 
from our honored grandfather John Hall, Deed;" 
dated Oct. 19, 1724. (Wallingford Land, Book 4, 
p. 454. ) These facts prove that Mary Hall was 
Henry Cook's first and only wife. She named her first 
daughter "Mary" for herself, her second daughter 
"Jane" for her mother, her first son "Henry" for 
her husband, and her second son "John" for her 
tiither. Elizabeth, Jonathan, and David also ap 
pear to have been named for the Halls, 



4G 

The inventory of the estate of Henry Cook, £G57. 
9. 7., with the names and ages of his children, was 
filed third Tuesday in Maich, 1705, Adin. granted 
same day to Mary Cook, widow, and Henry Cook, 
son of the deed. (New IJaven County Court records. 
Vol. 2, 211.) Final distribution of the estate, Mar. 
2. 171S-lf>. (New Haven Probate, Vol. 4, 5G1.) 
The widow Mary Cook, d. May ;}1, 1718. Adm. 
was granted on the estate of "Mary Cook late of 
Wallingfoid, widow : to her eldest son Henry 
Cook.'^ Dec 9, 1718. (New Haven Probate, Vol. 
4, 553.) 

Children. 

i. Makv,-'' 1). July 15, l(i78, tit Salem. :\rass., m. .July 7, 1708, 
Jeremiah lluw, at Wallingfunl, Conn. They removed to 
Brooklield, N. H., before March 4, 1722-.3, but were 
living at Wallingford again Mareh 19, 1729, at which 
time he is called ''Jeremiah How ye 2d." 

ii. Jam:, li. about ItiSl, m. July 7, 1708, Joseph, son of 
Eliasaph and Elizal)eth (Beach,) Preston, b. March 10, 
UiSl. 

iii. Hexkv, 1). al)out 1683; m. 1st. Experience Lvman, dau. of 
Robert, of Nortlilield, Mass. She d. Oct" 8, 1709. He 
m. 2nd., Feb. 13, 1710, Mary, dan. of John and Mercy 
(Paine,) Frost, of New Haven, Conn., and widow of 
John AVeadon of Branford, Conn. She died ^lay 31, 
1718, and he m. 3d., Sarah, dau. of Samuel Towner and 
widow of Samuel Frost of Branford. Henry Cook re- 
moved about 1729 to that part of Waterl)ury which is 
now Plymouth, Conn., locating where the upi)er portion 
of the village of Thomaston is l)uilt. He is ai'credited as 
the first settler of Plymouth, and was called "the soldier 
of the wilderness." "We have found him to be a man 
of courage, enterprise, and a spirit that withstood in- 
justice, was one of the foi-emost jiromotors of the 
established church * * * but the next year went 
over ti) the Church of England." His grandson Lemuel 
(son of his son Henry,) is believed the last survivor of 
the soldiers of the Revohitionarv war and died ]Mav 20, 
18()t), aged 102. (New History \Vaterl)ury. Voi. 1, 315.) 

iv. Jonx, b. about 1685, m. Dec. 12, 1710, Abiy:al Johnson 

V. Hannah, b. aliout IHOO, m. Nov. 26, 1713, Timothv, son of 
Thomas Beach, b. .Tan. 11, 1689. 

vi. Isaac, b. alxnit 1692, m. Hannah, dau. of Luke Hill. 
Demetrius Cook of Branford, Conn., .son of Isaac, in a 
deed dated Oct. 13, 1739, names his "honored irran<l- 
father, Luke Hill, of (iuilford." (Branford land. Vol. 6, 
223.) 

vii. Ei.iZAHETii, b. April, 1694. 



viii. Elizabeth ajj:ain, li. iihont Kl'.Ki, m. Aug. 24, 1717, Adam 
Nott. 

ix. Jonathan, b. about 1(598. His luiiue appearis in the list of 
children apjiended to the inventory of his father's estate 
1705, but neither he nor his lieirs are mentioned in the 
distribution of the said estate. Mar. 2, 1718-19. 

X. David, b. al)out 1701, in. Rebecca Wilson. 

xi. jEDiniAii, 1). about 1703, m. Aug. 11, 1727, Sarah Rexford, 
probablv dan. of Arthur and Elizabeth (Stevens,) Rex- 
ford, of New Haven, Conn., b. Sept. 6, 1705. (Tuttle 
Family, p. 235.) The Sarah Rexfonl who m. in 1760, 
Ezekiel Tuttle, was yirobablv dan. of Arthur and Jemima 
Rexford, b. :\Iar. 21, 1728. (Wallingford, Conn, 
records. ) 

Daniel^ Hall, ( John:" John,^ ) b. July 26, 1672, 
m. Marcli 15, 169.3, Thankful, dau. of Kicliard 
Lyman and cousin of Mary Lyman, who m. John 
Hall, No. 12. He resided at Wallingford, Abra- 
ham and Isaac Cook, Exrs., will of Daniel Hall of 
Wallingford ''in 77tli year of his age" presented said 
will for probate the first Monday of Dec, 1750. 
The will names his dau. Silence, wife of John 
Allison, eldest son Preserved Hall ; three grand- 
sous, Giles, Jacob, and Daniel, sons of Jacob deed., 
and son Abraham. (]S"ew Haven Probate, Vol. 7, 
p. 699. ) The division to the three grandsons was 
filed by Eliakim Hall, in behalf of Abraham Hall, 
the third Monday of Aug., 1751. (New Haven 
Probate, Vol. 8, p. 29.) 

Children. 

i. Daniel,^ b. Jan. 4, 1693-4. 

ii. Daniel, b. Feb. 19, 1695. 

iii. Samuel, b. Nov. 5, 1697. 

iv. Silence, b. Oct. 6, 1699, m. John Allison. 

V. Preserved, b. Jan. 15, 1700. 

vi. Jacob, b. 1705, m. Dec. 21, 1726, Elizabeth Roys. Adm. 
on his estate granted to his widow Elizal)eth, Nov. 17, 
1747. Children, Giles, Daniel, Jacob, Thankful & Louis. 
(New Haven Probate, Vol. 7, p. 150.) Jacob Hall's 
widow m. before Jan. 13, 1757, John Audruss, as is shown 
bv the probate record of her son Jacob's estate. (New 
Haven Probate, Vol. 9, p. 24.) On June 1, 1768, she was 
"Widow Andrews of Goshen, Conn. ; the dau. Lois had 
married Ebenezer Turrell of New Preston, Conn. ; 
Thankful was unmarried, and she and Daniel were living 
at Wallingford. (Land, Book 17, p. 540.) 



48 

vii. Ai!i;aiia.m Hai.i., 1.. Feb. 5, 170W, d. Sej.t. Ki. 1761, age 53, 
III. .M.;y 5, 1741, Sarah Doolittle. His will <latc(i .May 11, 
1701, naint'.'^ wilV Sarah ami sons Eldad, Medad and 
Isaar. Friend Dea. Sand. Hall, Kxr. Will proljated 
Dec, 1701. (New Haven Probate, Vol. 9, p. 024.) 

10. NATHANIEL'' Il.u.L, { John,- Joku,^ ) b. Feb. 8, 1677, 
residence, Walliiii^ford, d. Aug. 16, 1757, m. May 
11, 1699, Eli/.al)etli, dan. of Thoma.s and Mary 
(Merrimaii) Curtis, b. Sept. 11. 16S(>, d. Sept. 30, 
1735. He m. (2) Sept. 15, 1736, Lydia, dau. of 
Thomas Hotchkiss and widow of Ebenezer Johnson 
of Cheshire, Conn. (New Haven Land, Vol. lU, p. 
243.) On March 12, 1749-50, Nathaniel Hall and 
Lydia his wife, sell to Joseph Hall of Wallin.^lord, 
interest in the farm on "which Ebenezer Johnson 
late of said town deceased last dwelt." (Walling- 
ford Land, Book 11, p. 587.) Thomas Curtis, Senr., 
of Wallingford, deeds land "to my grandson 
Nathaniel Hall son of Nathaniel Hall" of W ailing- 
ford, "teeth drawer" who was living with the said 
Curtis, March 8, 1723. (Wallingford Land, Book 
4, p. 11.) The children nani*^d below, except 
Margaret and Nathaniel, convey interest in the 
estate of their "hononrod grandfathei* Ensign 
Thomas Curtis, late of Wallingford deed.", April 
13, 1742. (Wallingford Land, Book 8, p. 572.) 

Children. 

i. Amos,+ b. Jan. 24. 1700, d. Nov. 30, 1752, ni. Jnne 8, 1720, 
Kuth, dan. of Robert and Marv (Porter,) Rovs, b. Sept., 
1701. She d. Feb. 2, 1775. His will dated Jnly 1, 1752, 
proliated Jan. 15, 1753, names wife Rnth, sons Renben, 
Amos, and Muses, and danghters Knniee, wife of Abner 
Averd, and Lois, wife of Caleb Culver. (New Haven 
Prol)ate, Vol. 9, ]). 213.) 

ii. M.\HG.\KKrrA, 1). Dee. 21, 1701, d. Oct. 30, 1707. 

ill. Cai.kh, b. Jan. 5, 1703, d. Mav 11, 1766. m. Mav 11. 1726, 
p:sther Umberlield. His will dated Jan. 11, 1766, Pro- 
liated Jnne, 1767, appoints Elisha A\'hittlesey Exr.>; calls 
himself "in the 62nd year of his ajje", and names wife 
Esther, sons Nathaniel, Calel), Titus, and Jonah ; 
dan<rhters Esther, wife of Ichabod Eewis, Lydia, wife of 
Philemon Doolittle, Desire, wife of Moses Holt, Sarah, 
wife of Noah To'ld, .Margaret, Rhoda, and Lucretia Hall. 
(New Haven Probate, Vol. iO, p. 423.) 



49 

iv. MosKS, 1). June fi, 1700, «1. Feb. 15, 1705, ni. (1) Dec. 21, 
l7i;(), Klizal)eth, dan. of Zachariah How, who was son of 
Zai'liariah the first of Wallin^'ford. (J.,aii(i, Book 5, p. 289, 
and Book 6, p. 20.) ni. (2) Pfiehe, who afterwards ni. 
Nathaniel Jones. Will prol)at('d 1765, does not mention 
any children. (New Haven Trobate, Vol. 10, pp. 240 
and .'>()5. ) 

V. Mary, b, Oct. 80, 1707, ni. April 2, 17S2, Joshua Austin. 

vi. Nathaniel, b. April 17, 1711, d. Dec. 18, 1727. 

vii. James, b. April 23, 171.S, m. Hept. 15, 17;-{5, Hannah Cook. 

viii. P^i.iZABETii, 1). Sej>t. 22, 1715, ni. David Fowler of Durham. 

ix. Desire, b. June 19, 1719, m. Timothy Shattuck of 
Middletown. 

X. Harmon, b. Oct. 17, 1720. 



11. JOHN^ Hali., (John,- John, ^ ) b. March 14, 1681, 
residence, Wallingfoid, d. April 27, 1766, age 85, 
m. June 25, 1707, Elizabeth, dan. of Nathaniel and 
Sarah (Lothrop) Eoyce, b. Dec. 28, 1689, d. Sept. 
2, 1755, age 6(). "Nathaniel Eoys" calls this John 
Hall "Deacon" Jan. 18, 1720. (Wallingford Land, 
Book S, p. 414.) On Feb. 25, 1727-8, John Hall of 
Wallingford, with the consent of his "wife Elizabeth 
Hall, Alias Royce, Daughter of Ensign Nathaniel 
Eoyce of sd Wallingford Deed, his wife Sarah 
Eoyce, Alias Lothrop, daughter of Mr. Samuel 
Lothrop of Norwich," conveys interests that came 
in ^ 'right of our Hon*^ mother the said Mrs. Sarah 
Eoyce, dec^ and her part or share of sd Father Mr. 
Samuel Lothrop." (New London Land, Book 11, 
p, 31.) 

Children. 

i, Peter,3 b. July 22, 1708, d. Sept. 25, 1798, m. Oct. 29, 

1732, Rebecca Bartholomew, 
ii. John, 1). Dec. 29, 1712. 
iii. Abel, (Wallingford Land, Book 6, p. 695.) 
iv. AsAHEL, b. Jan. 19, 1717. 

V. RoYCE, b. Dec. 26, 1718 ; grad. Yale 1735, d. May 29, 1752. 
vi. Abigail, b. ]\Iarch 7, 1723. 
vii. Elizabeth, b. Julv 9, 1725. 
viii. Benjamin, b. April 4, 1728, d. Dec. 11, 1806, m. Phebe 

Hall, 
ix. Elisha, b. Sept. 15, 1730. 
X. Sarah, b. Aug. 25, 1732, 



no 

12. John3 Hall, {Samuel;- John, '^ ) b. Dec. 23, 1670, d. 
Ai)ril 20, 1730, u<;v 00. His funeral seniioii, ]tieacli- 
ed by liev. Miv Whilllesey, "was pi'iiited. He iii. 
Dec. 8, 1692, Mary, dan. of John and Dorcas 
(Phinibe,) Lyman, Miiod. Ort. 10, 1740. Perhai)S 
this John -was the n-picscntatix e and called Hon. 
John Hall. One John Hall was in 1715 called 
Capt. .John Hall "Gentleman". (Wallinj^ford Land. 
Book 2, p. 050.) The Avill of "John Hall Esqr." 
was dated March 2«), 1730, tiled An"-. 10, 1730. 
Sous John and Kev. Samuel, Executors. The other 
sons were Caleb, Benjamin, Eliakiui and Elihn. 
Wife, Mary, and dan. Eunice Law. (Js'eAv Havtii 
Probate, Vol. 0. p. 14.) Adm. estate of Mrs. Mary 
Hall was granted to Benjamin Hall, lii'st Monday (if 
Nov., 1749. (New Haven Probate. Vol. 7, p. 150.) 
See also Hall Ancestry, pp. 220 to 233. 

Children. 

19. i. .ToiiN, ' b. Sei)t. 15, 169o, in. ^Mairh o, 171(5, Mary Street. 

20. ii. Khv. Hamiki., 1). Oct. 4, 1695, m. Jan 12, 1725, "Ann Law. 
iii. Cai.kh, ]). Si'i.t. 14, l(i97, d. July 27, 1749, m. :\Iay 15, 

1721, Daniaris, (lau. of Jonathan and Knth (Peck,) At- 
water, b. Oct. 9, 1698. She d. July 29, 1762. (Dickennan 
Genealogy, p. 117.) On June o, 1766, Thomas Potwine 
and Lydia his wife, of Windsor, Stephen Hall and Tim- 
othy Hall of Wallin<j:fonl, and Josiali Fowler and Ruth 
his wife, of l>ranlord, deed land to Caleb Hall, 2n(l, that 
came to them "in the right of our mother Hamaris Hall, 
late of Walliiifrford dec'd." (Wallingford land. Bonk 
IH, p. 331.) These grantors were the children of Oaleb 
and Daniaris Hall, and probably the grantee was their 
brother. 

iv. ErxicK, b. ?*larcli 7, 1700, m. (1) Sanmel Andrew, son of 
Prest. of Yale (2) Oov. Jonathan Law, (3) Col. Joseph 
Pitkin of Hartford. 

V. Bkn.iamin, b. Aug. 28, 1702, d. in infancy. 

vi. Bknma.mix, b. Dec. 17, 1704, m. Feb. 20, 1727, Abiah 
Chauncey. 

vii. Sarah, b. April 15, 170(i. 

viii. EuAKiM, b. Aug. 9, 1711, m. Oct. 17, 1734, Ruth, dau. of 
Mrs. Mary Dickennan who was the dau. of Jonathan 
Atwater. " (New Haven Land, Vol. 20, p. 1.) Shed. 
Dec. 18, 1752, and he m. (2) Elizabeth Day. (Dicker- 
man Genealogy, {>. 309. ) 

21. ix. Eluiu, b. Feb. \1, 1714, m. Jan. 2, 1734, Lois Whittlesey. 



51 

13. Samuel^* Hall, { Samuel;^ John, ^ ) b. Dec. 10, 1680, 

residence, Wallingtbi'd, d, June 15, 1770, age 90, 
m. May 2, 1704, Love, dan. of Natlianiel and Sarah 
(Lotlirop,) Eoyce, b. Jnly 29, 1687 ; sister to Eliza- 
bet li >y1io ui. John No. 11. "Nathaniel Koys" conveys 
land Sept. 14, 1714, "unto my two sons-in-law 
Samii & John Hall" both of Wallingford. (Land, 
Book 3, p. 56. ) "Nathaniel Roys, Senr.," to his "son- 
in-law Samuel Hall", Sept. 21, 1724, and to Samuel 
Hall "and my daughter Love Hall", Nov. 11, 1725. 
(Wallingford Land, Book 5, pp. 76 and 134.) He 
m. (2) Bridget. 

Children. 

i. TiiEOPiiiLrs, I 1). April 1, 1707. Rev. Theophihis Hall m. 

May 22, 1734, Mrs. Hannah Avery (James), 
ii. Sa.mi-el, b. June 8, 1709, d. Dec' 24, 1782, was Deacon. 

m. Dec. 27, 1732, Sarah Hull, 
iii. Hannah, b. July 15, 1711. One Hannah Hall ni. June 5, 

1734, John Street of Wallinarford. 
iv. Sarah, b. Dec. 6, 1713, m. Feb. 21, 1733, Samuel Ibill. 
V. Mehitable, 1). April 25, 1716. 
vi. Esther, b. Nov. 7, 1719. 

14. Thomas^ Hall, ( lliomas,'^ John,^ ) b. July 17, 
1676, d. Aug. 27, 1741, m. April 26, 1710, Abigail, 
dau. of John and Abigail (Mansfield, ) Atwater, b. 
Oct. 17, 1685. They resided at Wallingford. 

Children. 

i. Thomas, -i b. March 10, 1712, m. April 24, 1734, Lydia 

Curtis. 
ii. Phineas, b, April 12, 1715, m. Anna, 
iii. Abigail, b. April 12, 1719, d. Jan. 12, 1737. 
iv. Joshua, b. May 23, 1722, m. Hamiah. 

15. Jonathan^ Hall, ( Thornas,'^ JoJm,^ ) b. July 25, 
1679, d. Jan. 15, 1760, age 80, m. May 12, 1703, 
Dinah, dau. of Samuel and Elizabeth Andrews, b. 
July 25, 1684, d. Oct. 24, 1763 ; residence, Wall- 
ingford. 



52 

Children. 

i. Davio,-* b, Oct. Ifi, 1705, m. Sept. 23, 1730, Allie Case. 
Estate proV)ate(l first Mnntlay of Nov. 175.=), leaving wife 
AUip, sons David, lienajah, Anaph, Klkaiiah iN: Bate, & 
(lauf^hters, Phebe, Lois, ».'<: Luce. (New Haven Probate, 
Vol. S. p. 471.) 

ii. Jonathan, ]>. Jan. 13, 1708. Adm. on his estate to his 
brother David, July o, 1754. Inventory inckides fourth 
part of the sloop "Esther Burthen." (New Haven Pro- 
bate, Vol. 8, pp. 363 and 379.) 

iii. Joseph, b. May 31, 1710, m. Aj.ril 19, 173t), Hannah 
iScoficJil. 

iv. Anna, 1). Jan. 18, 1713. 
22. V. L«iAAC, b. Julv 11, 1714. 

vi. PirEBE, b. Feb. 12, 1717, d. Mav 14, 1735. 

vii. EzEKiEL, }). May 12, 1719, ni. 'Oct. 29, 1763, Anna An- 
drews. 

viii. Ben.iamin, b. d. Aug. 8, 1722. 

i.x. Thankful, b. Sept. 30, 1722. 

X. Benjamin, b. Oct. 20, 1725. 

xi. Experience, b. April 16, 1727. 

16. Joseph^Hall, { Thomas,'^ John,'^ ) b. July 8, 1681, 

d. Nov. 3, 1748, m. Nov. 13, 1706, Bathia Terrel, 
d. Bee. 28, 1753. Eesidence, Walliugford. 

Children. 

i. TEMPER.\NCE,-i b. Feb. 15, 1714, d. Dec. 7, 1717. 

ii. Joseph, h. Sept. 23, 1718, d. Sept. 6, 1737, m. June 16, 

1737, Abigail Judd. 
iii. Epiikaim, b. April 25, 1723. 

17. Daniel-^ Hall, ( Thomas,'- JoJm,'^ ) b. Jan. 27, 1689, 

residence, Wallingford, m. April 20, 1721, Martha, 
dan. Samuel Doolittle, b. April 6, 1698. 

Children. 

i. ABR.\.nAM,* b. June 27, 1722, m. Hannah. Adm. on his 
estate "granted to John Hall, (Hannah Hall the widow 
of sd. deed, desiring the same : )" first Monday of Jan., 
1761. John Berry of Wallingfonl appointed guardian to 
Abraham and Josiah ; Daniel Hall, 2nd, guardian to 
Eufus ; and Hannah Hall to Mary and Sarah, all minor 
children of the said decased. (New Haven Probate, Vol. 
9, pp. 451 &503.) 

ii. John, b. Jan. 29, 1724. 

iii. Hannah, b. Sejit. 11, 1725, m. Benajah Tyler. 

iv. Daniel, b. June 1, 1727, settled in Meriden. 



53 

V. Martha, h. June 14, 1729. 

vi. Samii;!., 1). May 5, 1731. 

vii. Mary, b. Sept. 17, M'.VA. 

viii. Abigail, b. April 27, 1739. 

18. Israel^ Hall, ( Thomas,- John} ) b. Oct. 8. 1696, 

residence, Walliiigford, m. April 4, 1721, Abigail 
Powell. 

Children. 

i. Sarah,! |j. March 14, 1722. 

ii. Exos, b. March 30, 1726. 

iii. Israel, 1). Oct. 22, 1728. 

iv. Abigail, b. March 22, 1731, d. Aug. 5, 1733. 

V. JoTHAM, b. Fel). 6, 1737. 

vi. Abigail, 1). .July 5, 1744. 

vii. Mary, b. June 23, 1749. 

viii. Eunice, b. Feb. 6, 1751. 

19. John* Hall, {John,'-^ Samuel,- John,^ ) b. Sept. 15, 

1692 ; d. June 18, 1773, age 80, m. March 5, 1716, 
Mary, dan. of Eev. Samuel and Anna (Miles, ) 
Street, the first minister of Wallingford, and son 
of Rev. Nicholas Street of England, the first minister 
at Taunton, Mass., and after\Yards teacher and then 
pastor at Kew Haven until his death, 1674, He 
was the first pastor to die in the service of the 
church at Xew Haven. The Eev. Samuel was a 
graduate of Harvard, 1664, and an original pro- 
prietor of Wallingford. See Street Familv, 
K"umbers 1, 2, 21, 52, 53 and 55. John Hall 
represented the town at the General Court. He 
made a will which is not found of record (one of 
the first books of the Wallingford Probate records 
is lost) . This will is mentioned in the unique deed 
of Dr. Lyman Hall to his sisters as follows : — 

^'To Mrs. Mary Foot, Dr. Dickinson & Eunice 
his wife, & Mr. Elnathan Street and Susa his wife 
Brothers by Marriage & Sisters by Blood to the sub- 
scriber Greeting — in consideration of which I here- 
by authorize you or a Majority of you, to take into 
your possession and Under your Care & Direction 
all that my Eeal & Movable Estate Bequeathed & 



54 

Divided to me by the Will & Testament of my 
Hon'i Father John Hall late of Wallingford deceas- 
ed * * -^ to pay the Yearly Rent of one Peper Corn 
yearly & every year on the lirst Day of Jan>' if the 
same shall be demanded on the same." Aug. 28^ 
17 7(1. 

*'Eeeed to record Your afCeetionate Brother 

Oct. 2, 1702." ''LYMAN HALL." 

(Wallin^^ford Land, Book 27, p. 494.) 

The will of Mary (Street.) Hall is recorded in 
Vol. 1, Wallingford Probate, p. 1<>."). It is dated 
May 30, 1776, and names her daughters Hannah 
Hall, Mary Foot, Susannah Street and Eunice 
Dickinson. Dea. Samuel Street, Exr. The inven- 
tory was taken June 19, 1777. 

Children. 

i. Hannah,' h. Jan. 29, 1717. Was living unmarried in 
1786. 

ii. John, b. d. April 2o, 1737. 

iii. Ei'NiCE, m. Dr. John Dickinson of ^liddletown, son of the 
Rev. jNIoses and Martha Dickinson of Norwalk, Conn., 
1). Oct. 6, 1729. 

iv. STHKirr, b. Nov. 12, 1721, was a Colonel in the Revolu- 
tionary war, lu. June 30, 174S, Hannah, dau. of Josiah 
and Hannah (Baldwin,) Fowler, of Durham, b. April 
12, 1725. 
23. v. Lymax, b. April 12, 1724, m. Marv Osliorne. 

vi. SrsAN.NAH, 1). April 9, 1726, d. July .'5, 1797, m. Dec. 28, 
1769, her first cousin, Elnathan Street, Jr., h. FeV). 20, 
1732. Elnathan and Susannah Street were land owners 
in Wallinjiford from 1775 to 1788, or longer. (Walling- 
ford Eand, Book 16, p. 36, Book 24, p. 450, and Book 26, 
p. 194.) Some of this land was part of that jriven l)y 
"Doctor I.yinan Hall" to his three sisters, Mary Foote, 
Su.sannah Street, ami Eunice Dickinson. (Book 26, p. 
270. ) From these facts the statement in ' 'Street Family" 
under No. 54, that this Susannah was at this time the 
wife of Elisha Whittlesev must be an error. 

vii. Gii.Ks, h. Feb IS, 1733,' d. March 17, 1TS9, m. Nov. 27, 
1759, ^lartha Robinson who d. April 2, 1766, m. (2) Dec. 
24, 1772, ^Irs. Thankful Merriman of AVallingford. 

viii. Rhoda, b. April 14, 1734, d. Aug. 23, 1751. 

ix. Mauy, b. 1718, d. at Branford, Conn., May 6, 1792, m. 
Isaac Foote, son of John and ]Marv Foote, b, Julv 6., 
1717, d. at CJreenbush, N. Y., Oct.. 17"65. 



55 

30. Rev. Samuel^ ITall, (John,-^ Samuel,- John,^ ) b, 

Oct. 4, 1695, d. Feb. 26, 177(;, m. Jau. 12, 1725, 
Ann Law, dan. .lonathan Law, Governoi- of Conn., 
Grad. at Yale, 1716, and was tntor there from 
1716 to 1718 ; became pastor of the church in 
Cheshire in 1724. (Hall Ancestry, pp. 255 to 272.) 

Children, all b. in Cheshire. 

i. SAMrEi.," b. July 23, 1727, "by wife Ann, dan. of IMr. Law 
of ^lilforil. In' his wife Ann, dau. of I\Ir Eliot of (-iuil- 
ford, by his wife Sarah, dau. of INlr. Win. Brenton of 
Road Island" (Wallingford, Conn., records.) d. Aug. 
23, 1727. 

ii. JoxATiiAX, b. July 11, 1728, d. July 12, 1728. 

iii. Benoni, b. Nov. 4, 1729, d. Nov. 19, 1729. 

iv. Lrcv, 1>. Sept. 11, 1730, ni. June 13, 1751, Charles, son of 
Rev. Samuel and Ruth (Dudley,) Whittlesey, minister 
of Wallingford. 

V. Samuel, b: Jan. 11, 1731-2, d. Mav 19, 1732, of small pox. 

vi. Ann, b. May 10, 1733, m. Nov. 13, 1752, Rev. Warham, 
son of Rev. Stephen \Villiams, Fellow and Secretary of 
Yale CoUeire. 

vii. Samuel, b. May 31, 1734. Grad. at Yale. 

viii. Mary, b. Nov. 5, 1736, m. Dea. Samuel Beach of Cheshire, 
Yale 1757, a prominent attorney and a delegate to the 
convention which framed the Constitution of the U. S. 

24. ix. Brextox', b. April 2, 1738, lirst representative from 

Meriden. 
X. Elisha, b. March 10, 1740. 
xi. Sarah, b. Aug. 8, 1742. 
xii. Joxatiiax, b. July 19, 1745. 

25. xiii. Abigail, b. Dec. 17, 1748, m. Rev. John Foote. Their son 

Samuel A. was Governor of Conn, and IT. S. Senator. 
Their grandson was Admiral Andrew H. Foote. 

31. Elihu^ Hall, ( John, '^ Samuel,- John,'^ ) b. Feb. 

17, 1714, d. in London, Eng., 1784, age 70, m. Jan. 
2, 1734, Lois, dan. of Rev. Samuel and Sarah 
(Chauucey,) Whittlesey ; b. Nov. 28, 1714, grad. 
at Yale and in 1750, was King's attorney and held 
the title of Colonel. In 1780 he removed to London. 



Was the wife of Ej^hraim John- 





Children. 




i. 


Lois,5 b. May 11, 
son in 1787. ' 


1735. 


ii. 


Hezekiah, b. May 


4, 1737, 


iii. 


Sarah, b. July 24, 


1729. 



oo 



56 

iv. John, h. Jan. IS, 1739, ni. 177L', Marv JamcP, and had 

Nicholas .Street, b. Mar. 27, 1773. 
V. n.vMAKis, b. Oc-t. 6, 1741. Wa.s Daiuari.s Doolittle in 1787. 
vi. 1m. I III', b. An>r 13, 1744. 
vii. Kum-, b. March ].'), 174.'). 
viii. ErxiCE, b. March L', 1749. 
ix. LiTY, b. Nov. 14, 17nl. 
X. KiNicE, 1). An<r. 11, 1754. 
xi. Katiiehine, was the wife of Iliel Hall of Wallingford, 

June 11, 17S7. (Wallingford land, Book 24, pp. 536 and 

ISA.vc* H.A.LL, i/onatlian,^ Thomas;^ /o/iH,^ ) b. Wall- 
in <,'ford, July 11, 1714, d. March 7, 1781, a^a- (JO, 
m. Nov. 5, 1731), Mary, dan. John and Elizal)etli 
Moss, b. April 22. 1716, d. Oct. 9, 171)1. John 
Moss was son of John and Mary (Lothrop. ) Moss, 
son of John Moss, one of the founders of Walling- 
ford, which he frequently i-epreseuted in the 
Assei(i])]y. Isaac Hall was a ])hysician practicing 
in Wallingford and Mcrideu. 

Children. 

i. Mary,'' b. Oct. 5, 1742. 

ii. I.SA.\c, 1). Mav 7, 174."i. 

iii. Joel, b. Ai)ril 3, 1747, d. Oct. 22, 1748. 

iv. E.STIIER, }). March 18, 1751. 

V. Elizauktii, b. June 11, 1752. 

26. vi. JoNATiiAX, b. Dec. II, 1757. 

23. Ly^ian'^ Hall. { John, ^ John,^ Samuel :^ John,^ )h. iu 
Wallingford, Conn., April 12, 1724; d. in Georgia, 
Oct. 19, 1790, age GO. He married, before leaving 
Conn., Mary Osborne, who was a descendant of the 
same family as his grandmother, and had childi-en, 
but none survived him. He grad. at Yale 1747 ; 
studied medicine, and in 1752 located in St. John's 
Parish, Georgia. He was principally instrumental 
in inducing Georgia to come into the Union in 1775, 
and for four years after he represented Georgia in 
the Continental Congress and was one of the Signers 
of the Declaration of Independence and Governor of 
Georgia. A monument to his memory stands in the 
city of Augusta to which his remains were removed 
by the State of Georgia, and also in the cemetery in 
his native village of Wallingford. See also Hall 
Ancestry, pp. 304 to 312. 



57- 

•24. BrkntoiV Hall, {Samuel,* /oh n,^ Samuel;' /ohn,'^ ) 
b. in Cheshire, Conn., April 2, 1738, d. in Meri- 
den, Nov. 25, 1820, age 82; m. (1) Feb. 18, 1762, 
Lament Collins, m. (2) Abigail (Baldwin,) Guy of 
Branford. He lived in Meriden and was a farmer. 
See also Hall Ancestry, pp. 29J) to 312. 

Children. 

27. i. William" Brenton, b. May 31, 1764. 

ii. Collins, 1). Jan. S, \766. 

iii. Samiel, 1). .Tune 10, 17(>S. 

iv. Lament, b. July 14, 1776. 

V. JOAB. 

25. Abigail'^ Hall, {Samuel,'^ John;-^ Samuel:^ John,^ ) 

b. Dec. 7, 1748, d. K^ov. 19, 1788, ;ige 39, m. John 
Foote, b. April 5, 1742, d. Aug. 3], 1813. age 71. 
Grad. Yale, 1765, studied divinity with his wife's 
father and succeeded him as pastor of the (^heshire 
church. 

Children. 

i. AbigailG Sarah Hall, b. Jan. 2, 1769, d. Jan. 20, 1775 

11. Mary Ann, b. >Sept. 21, 1770, in. Dr. Thomas T. Cornwall 
and was mother of Hon. Edward A. Corn wall, of Cheshire' 

iii. John Alfred, b. Jan. 2, 1774, d. Auo- 25 171)4 

iv. Abigail, b. Sept. 16, 1776, d. Aiia. 9'; 1778. 

v. AViLLiAM Lambert, b. Oct. 10, 1778. 

vi. Samuel Augustu.s, b. Nov. 8, 1780. 

vii. Roderick, b. Dec. 15, 1782, d. May 16, 1791. 

viii. Matilda, b. 3Iay 6, 1785, d. Oct. 9, 1787. 

26. Jonathan^ Hall, ( Isaac,^ lonathan,-' Thomas;^ 

/ohn,^ ) b. in Meriden, Dec. 11, 1757, d. June 6, 
1832, m. May 14, 1777, Martha Collins, d. May, 
1841, age 83. He was a physician and removed to 
N'ew Hartford, jST. Y,, in 1787. 

Children. 

i. Isaac," b. Feb. 22, 1778. 

ii. Keturah, b. Nov. 17, 1780. 

iii. Sylvia, b. Sept. 18, 1782. 

iv. Jonathan, b. Aug. 14. 1784. 

V. Eli, b. Mav 14, 1786. 

28. vi. Ira, b. July 10, 1788. 

vii. Mary Moss, b. April 12, 1790. 

viii. Agnes Collins, b. Aug. 6, 1 793. 

ix. Amos Hull, b. Feb. 12, 1796. 

X. Jedediah Sanger, b. Nov. 2, 1797. 

xi. Sarah T., b. May 6, 1799. 



58 

27. William*' Brenton Hall, ( Brcnton,^ Samuel,^ 
John:^ Samuel,- John,^ ) b. May 31, 1704, d. at 
MiddU'town, July 29, 18(){», in, March 6, 17;)6, 
Meliitable Parsons, dan. of Major General Samuel 
llolden Parsons, of the Continental army. He was 
a prominent physician in Meridcn and a graduate 
of Yale, 17SG. 

Children. 

i. .Mkiiitaui.i:" Parsons, b. Dec. o, 1796, d. in live days. 

ii. Wii.i.iAM Bkicntox, b. Mav 17, 1798, d. Fch. 5, 1824, in. 

.Merry Hul)))ard, of Middletown, and hail William who 

(1. unmarried. 

29. iii. Samiki. IIoi.DKN Parsons, 1). June 28, 1804. He removed 

to P)in>,'lianiton, N. Y., and was elected for two terms to 
the Senate of the State. 

28 Ira^ Hall, {/onathan/^ Isaac,'^/o)uithan,^ Thomas,^ 
/ohn,' ) h. in New Hartford, K. Y., July 10. 1788, 
d. Jan. 19, 1860, age 71, m. (1) Kate Eose, who d. 
Oct. 3, 1814, m. (2) Marcia Rounds. He was a 
physician and practiced in Skeneateles, N. Y. 

Children. 

30. i. Nathan- Kelsev, 1... March 28, 1810, d. March 2, 1874. 
ii. Ira V., b. Aug. 3, 1811. 

iii. Ira, b. Aug. 4, 1814. 
iv. (Catharine, b. Dec. 3, 1816. 
V. Mary, b. Sept. 17, 1819. 
vi. Eli Q., b. June 21, 1822. 
vii. SviAKSTER R., b. July 3, 1826. 
viii. Sarah, b. March 1, 1829. 
ix. Makcia, b. Sept. 29, 1831. 
Jane, b. April 4, 18.36. 



X. 



29. Samuel^ Holden Parsons Hall, ( Wm. Brenton,^ 
Brenton,'^ Rev. Samuel,* /olni,^ Samuel,'^ /oh7i,^ ) h. at 
Middletown, Conn., June 23, 1804, d. at Bingham- 
ton, N. Y., March 5, 1877, m. May 14, 1826, 
Emeline Bulkeley of Rocky Hill, Conn. She was 
b. Nov. 6, 1798, d. Aug. 28, 1855, m. (2) May 20, 
1857, Eluora Robbins, of New Hartford, N. Y., 
who was b. Dec. 11, 1812, d. June 4, 1879. After 
the death of his father in 1809 he lived with his 
uncle Enoch Parsons, Prest. of the Conn, branch 



^ 



59 

of the United States Bank. In 1837 he removed to 
Binghamtou, N. Y. H(> was elected to the State 
Senate in 1846 from the sixtli district, composed of 
nine counties, for the term of lour years and re-elect- 
ed for a second term. His children were all by his 
first wife. 

Children. 

' ^i"ot^^'''-rr '^^'^'^I,™'^ Hall, b. May 10, 1827; in. (1) Jan. 3, 
1855, Mary Rebecca Harris of Ballston Spa, N Y b 
Sept. 6, 1834, d. Nov. 10, 1881. 

Their children were : — 

1. Louise-' Harris, h. Mar. 17, 185S ; d. Sept. 4, 1858. 

2. Charles Harris, h. Mar. 19. 1860; ni. April 16, 
1885, Marion Musgrave ■\Vrip;ht, b. Aug. 16, 1863, 
and had, Fairfaxi" Hall, b. April 19, 1886. 

3. Arnold Harris, h. May 5, 1863 ; d. April 9, 1885. 

4. ,Samuel Hnlden Parsons, b. Oct. 10, 1868, ni. Nov. 
1, 1888, Helen C. Chai.il)erlain, 1). .July 22, 1S71 
and had Arnoldi<> Hall, b. March 2, 1901. 

Mr. C. S. Hall, m. (2) Oct 29, 1885, Annie Hastings 
Knowlton, b. Nov. 19, 1861, and had, 

5. Li/man Knowlton Hall, b. Dec. 10, 1892 ; d. July 
23, 1893. ^ 

William Brentox Hall, b .July 15, 1829 ; d. Jan. 27, 1856, 
m. March 18, 1851, Elizabeth S. J. Paddock, d. Dec. 15 
18oo. 

iii. Josephine EmelixkMeiiitable Hall, b. March 17 1831- 
d. Jan. 12, 1857, m. May 17, 1853, Hugh Allen of Brook- 
lyn N. \ ., b. April 15, 1827, d. Jan." 24, 1881. They 

1. Josephine'-' Annie Emeline, b. Dec. 24, 1856 • who 
m. June 19, 1884, Dr. Henry Hollirook Curtis of 
N. Y., and had, 1, Henryi" Holbrook Curtis b 
April 6, 1885, d. Jan. 25, 1888; 2, William Edniond 
Curtis, b. Jan. 4, 1890, d. Aug. 13, 1890 • 3 
Marjone Curtis, b. Nov. 11, 1888. 

'''• '^I'l^^?."'?,'- Parsons Hall, b. Dee. 15, 1835 ; m. Jan. 11, 
1860, Alexandrine Louise Codfroy of Detroit Mich b 
May 11, 1838. Their children were:- " 

1. Marie^ Stella Holden, b. Dec. 26, 1860 ; m. Jan. 2 

1880, AVilham Toone St. Auburn, b Mar ''>r>' 
1852. , ..L.1I. -o, 

2. Jospphine Emeline, b. June 5, 1863 ; m. Feb. 10, 

1886, Major Robert James Crombie Irvine, U. S.' 
A. They had, 1, Josephinei" Navarre, b. Vlarcli 
19, 1887, and 2, Beatrice, b. Aug. 17, 1888, d. Aug. 
2n, 1899. 



11. 



60 

3. Samuel Holden Parsons, )>. June 30, 1864 ; d. Dec. 

lo, 1864. 

4. Natlialir Heloise, h. .Juin- 1, l.S()(); ni. Oct. 27, 

1886, James Lee Scott, and had. Brentoni" Hall 
Scott, 1). Feb. 1, 18i»0. 

5. C or inne Alexandrine, b. Feb 11, 1868 ; d. Feb. 2, 

1869. 

6. Alexandrine Eugenie, b. Dec 4, 1869; d. Feb. 17, 

1892. 

7. Marie Archange Navarre, ]>. Sei)t. 7, 1S72 ; ni. 

June 28, 1899, Captain Fre<U'rick William 
Fuger, U. S. A., and had. Theodore'" Hall 
Fiiger, b. at Manilla, March 29, 1902. 

8. nndfrny Navarre, b. Mav :;i, 1S77 : d. Feb. 16. 

LSS5. 

9. Mnihrme Murom},, b. Julv 21. 18S1 ; d. Jan. 2, 

1902. 
V. RicjiARD Henky IlAi.i.. 1). Oct. 2S, 1839; d. Oct. 7, 
1872 ; m. (1) Oct. 28, 1861, Hannah Prescott Trowbridc-e, 
b. 3Iay 30, 1841 ; d. Dec 30, 18(i3. and had 

1. Edvin^ Trovhridqe Hnll, ]>. Dec. 16, 1863 : m. Oct. 
27, 1886, Cornelia Roi^s, b. Dec. IS, 1864, and 
had, Cornelia,'" b. .Se{)t. 5, 1887. 

Mr. R. H. Hall. ni. (2) Oct. 30, 1867, Kate Croswell, b. 
^larch 14, 1S4(). 

30. Nathan'^ Kklsey Hall, (Ira,'' Jonathan,'' Isaac,^ 
Jonathan-^ Thomas,'^ /ohn,^ ) h. in Skeneateles, X. 
Y., Marcli 28, 1810, d. Mareli 2, 3 874, in Bnftalo, 
N". Y., of angina pectoris; in. Nov. 16, 1832, Emily 
Payne, b. Aug. 5, 1811. He was appointed Post 
Master General by President Fillmore and subse- 
quently IT. S. District Judge for the Northern 
District of New York. 

Children. 

i. Natiia>;'< K., b. Oct. 13, 1833 ; d. Oct. 22, 183-^. 

ii. Frkdekk'K Ai'GUsTr.s, 1). Jan. 10, 1836 : d. at Andover, 

Mass., Jan. 7, 1852. 
iii. Emily A., b. Oct 9, 1838, m. {ieorire Gorhani, of Canan- 

daitrua. N. Y., Oct. 24, 1860, d. :Mav 29, 1863. 
iv. Fkank, b. .Tan. 7. 1845 ; d. at Washington. D. C, Mav 23, 

1S4S. 
V. (Jh.vce, I). Max 16, 1850, m. Nov. 4, 1868, Josiah Jewett 

of Buffalo, N. Y. 



/ 



SHEPARD-HALL LINEAGE. 



1. John Hall and Jaue Wolleu. 

2. Mary Hall and Henry Cook. 

3. Henry Cook and Mary Frost. 

-i. Pbebe Cook and Zerubbabel Jerome. 

5. Mary Jerome and Joseph Spencer. 

6. Mamre Spencer and William Gaylord. 

7. ^ncy Gaylord and Salmon Curtis. 

8. William Gaylord Curtis and Lucy Preston. 

9. Oelia Adelaide Curtis and James Shepard. 
10. Celia Antoinette Shepard. 



LIBRftRY ( 

11 III III 1 11 11 III 


DF CONGRESS 

II II .11 L: ': III II M 


1 ii: !ii III li 1!! : il 1! II '1 1! Ill '1 1 
018 458 986 2 • 



